the components of corporate brand …...help of the empirical part of the study. even though...
TRANSCRIPT
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Tiina Niemelä
THE COMPONENTS OF CORPORATE BRAND EQUITY IN SMES Case EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
Master’s Thesis
Department of Marketing
May 2009
UNIVERSITY OF OULU ABSTRACT OF THE MASTER'S THESIS Faculty of Economics and Business Administration
Unit Department of Marketing Author Niemelä, Tiina
Supervisor Tähtinen, J. & Saraniemi, S.
Title The components of corporate brand equity in SMEs, Case EHP-Tekniikka Ltd. Subject Marketing
Type of the degree Master’s Thesis
Time of publication May 2009
Number of pages 111+5
Abstract The aim of this research is to better understand corporate brand equity and its key components in small and medium-sized enterprises by exploring and clarifying the embodiment of the components. This is done by creating a model of the components based on the previous literature on the topic and by deepening the understanding of the phenomenon and framing the model to its final shape with the help of the empirical part of the study. Even though corporate branding and brand equity are current topics of interest together with branding in SMEs, they are topics which have not been previously studied together as such and thus it is seen important to reveal the phenomenon. The study uses abductive research reasoning and the reality in this study is understood as subjective. As the study aims at understanding and interpreting the phenomenon, action-oriented approach is used. In conducting the empirical research, qualitative methods are used especially to be able to describe real life. This is done by using case study and a single case company. Case study method was chosen to be able to reach detailed information about the phenomenon. Case study was also seen appropriate since it is said to be particularly adequate to new research areas, which is the case also in this study. Interviews were chosen for the main data collection method and with them insights were gained from three perspectives: the managing director, the employee and the customer of the organisation. The analysis was done using several themes and in this way the data was sliced into smaller and more understandable pieces. As a result of the analysis, empirically grounded, modified model of the theoretical framework is presented. The findings of the study conclude to a model of components of corporate brand equity in SMEs, together with the description of the embodiment of the components in the case company. The components of corporate brand equity in SMEs are stakeholders, name of the organisation, actions of the organisation, personnel, owner or manager, corporate core values, organisational culture and products and/or services of the organisation. In this study the components are divided into internal and external components. Stakeholders are part of the external component and the other components belong to internal components. The external environment of the organisation and the external components, stakeholders, also include brand equity assets. These assets are corporate brand loyalty, corporate brand awareness, perceived quality of the corporate brand and corporate brand associations. These brand equity assets are not concrete components of corporate brand equity, but relate to stakeholders and are seen in the study as a way for the stakeholders to see and evaluate corporate brand equity. The findings of the study can be used to better understand corporate brand equity and its components in the environment of small and medium-sized organisations. With being aware of the components, organisations have better abilities to take advantage of their corporate brand and to even increase corporate brand equity by affecting organisations’ own operations and components of corporate brand equity. When slicing corporate brand equity into components, organisations have better abilities to affect corporate brand equity and to examine the present state of it. As this study was conducted in a small organisation dealing with environmental technology, the findings as such can only be analytically generalised to describe other cases in the industry or in other fields of businesses. Keywords Corporate branding, branding in SMEs, corporate image, corporate identity Additional information The thesis is part of Corporate Branding Research Project (CoBra) in University of Oulu.
CONTENTS
Abstract
Contents
Figures and tables
1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Introduction to the topic ............................................................................... 7
1.2 Justification of the importance of the research topic ................................... 8
1.3 Purpose of the study................................................................................... 12
1.4 Key concepts .............................................................................................. 13
1.5 Research method ........................................................................................ 15
1.6 Structure of the study ................................................................................. 16
2 CORPORATE BRANDING IN SMES ............................................................... 18
2.1 Corporate branding..................................................................................... 18
2.1.1 The foundation of corporate brand..................................................... 21
2.1.2 Characteristics of corporate branding compared to product branding23
2.2 Branding in SMEs...................................................................................... 26
2.2.1 Differences between SMEs and larger organisations......................... 26
2.2.2 Characteristics of branding in SMEs ................................................. 29
2.3 Actors in corporate branding in SMEs....................................................... 30
2.3.1 The role of the manager ..................................................................... 30
2.3.2 The role of personnel ......................................................................... 32
2.3.3 The role of stakeholders, relationships and networks ........................ 35
3 CORPORATE BRAND EQUITY IN SMES ...................................................... 37
3.1 Clarification of the brand equity concept................................................... 37
3.2 Corporate brand equity............................................................................... 39
3.3 The formation of corporate brand equity in SMEs .................................... 41
3.3.1 External components of corporate brand equity in SMEs ................. 42
3.3.2 Internal components of corporate brand equity in SMEs................... 46
4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................ 50
4.1 Research method ........................................................................................ 50
4.2 Empirical research design .......................................................................... 53
5 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH .................................................................................. 57
5.1 Case company ............................................................................................ 57
5.2 Empirical analysis ...................................................................................... 58
5.2.1 Stakeholders ....................................................................................... 58
5.2.2 Corporate brand loyalty...................................................................... 64
5.2.3 Corporate brand awareness ................................................................ 66
5.2.4 Perceived quality of the corporation .................................................. 67
5.2.5 Corporate brand associations ............................................................. 69
5.2.6 Name of the organisation ................................................................... 70
5.2.7 Actions of the organisation ................................................................ 71
5.2.8 Personnel ............................................................................................ 73
5.2.9 Owner/manager .................................................................................. 77
5.2.10 Corporate core values......................................................................... 80
5.2.11 Organisational culture ........................................................................ 82
5.2.12 Product or service............................................................................... 86
5.3 Results of the empirical research ............................................................... 89
5.3.1 External components of corporate brand equity in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
89
5.3.2 Internal components of corporate brand equity in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
91
6 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 94
6.1 Summary .................................................................................................... 94
6.2 Theoretical contributions ........................................................................... 95
6.3 Managerial implications............................................................................. 98
6.4 Limitations of the study ............................................................................. 99
6.5 Reliability and validity............................................................................. 100
6.6 Suggestions for future research................................................................ 103
REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 105
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Outline of the interview, managing director..................................... 112
Appendix 2 Outline of the interview, employee .................................................. 114
Appendix 3 Outline of the interview, customer ................................................... 116
Appendix 4 Themes used in the analysis of the data ........................................... 118
Appendix 5 Embodiment of the components in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd .................. 119
FIGURES
Figure 1. The structure of the study ....................................................................... 17
Figure 2. A holistic understanding of corporate branding (Rode 2004 via Rode &
Vallaster 2005) ............................................................................................... 19
Figure 3. Foundation of corporate branding (Hatch & Schultz 2003) ................... 22
Figure 4. Stakeholder-based brand equity (adapted from Aaker 1992b and Aaker
1996) .............................................................................................................. 44
Figure 5. Corporate brand equity in SMEs from the wider perspective ................ 49
Figure 6. Components of corporate brand equity in SMEs.................................... 93
TABLES
Table 1. Differences between product branding and corporate branding .............. 25
Table 2. Differences between SMEs and larger organisations ............................... 28
Table 3. The interviews of the study ...................................................................... 55
Table 4. Methods used to improve validity and reliability of the study............... 103
1 INTRODUCTION
This study examines corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises
(SME). The following chapter introduces reader to the subject and the research topic
is being argued. Additionally, research questions are announced and research aims
introduced. In the end of the chapter, key concepts are being clarified and research
method and structure of the study are presented.
1.1 Introduction to the topic
Brands have become widely important and valued not only by customers, but also in
the environment of corporations and their audiences, including shareholders,
suppliers and governments (Olins 2000, 60). According to Wong and Merrilees
(2005), the brand should be the basis of the corporate strategy. This may lead to a
sustainable edge over competitors and may help to gain growth and expansion for the
organisation.
Brands can be seen as key factors of an organisation (Louro & Cunha 2001), or even
as critical elements for the success of an organisation (Wood 2000). Many
organisations are aiming to build strong brands for the benefits that may follow
(Hoeffler & Keller 2002). With branding organisations may for example increase the
financial value of the organisation (Kotler & Keller 2006, 274). Brands are also the
key elements for differentiating an organisation or a product from another (Kotler &
Keller 2006, 275). Olins (2000, 51) argues that brands are the only intangible assets
which organisations do not have to share with others. For the organisation and its
actors to be able to utilise the benefits of branding, it is important to know the
elements from which brands constitute of and which parts of the branding especially
bring value to the organisation.
The value of the brand can be seen as constituting from two different elements: the
accounting viewpoint sees brand value as financial profit or value of the brand (see
e.g. Biel 1992; Tuominen 2006), whereas the marketing scholars see brand equity as
the outcome of marketing actions related to the brand (see e.g. Pitta & Katsanis
1995; Keller 1993). These definitions are, however, only two determinants of the
8
topic and the terms can be seen in many different ways depending on the viewpoint
and researcher. Several approaches have been taken in the literature concerning
brand value and brand equity. Since there is no prevalent understanding of the
concepts, common terminology and philosophy of the subject are lacking (Wood
2000).
Frequently, brand can be seen as referring to products, but it may also refer to the
organisation as a whole, i.e. the brand of the organisation or corporation (Inskip
2004). Corporate branding has risen to interest both in the academic and
practitioners’ fields (Knox & Bickerton 2003). However, in corporate brand literature
there is a lack of empirical research behind the theory (Schoenfelder & Harris 2004).
The area has interested researchers, but much of the literature consists of theoretical
work.
It has also been concluded that there is a lack of properly identifiable background
theory for branding in SMEs and this reflects also the previous research results
(Abimbola & Kocak 2007). While branding in SMEs has been a rarely studied
phenomenon, it has been noted that branding in smaller organisations differs from
branding in large organisations (Ahonen 2008). Abimbola and Kocak (2007) also
note that the relevance of branding in SMEs has not been fully explained.
In this study corporate brand equity is understood as consisting of components,
which may be inside and outside the organisation. The assumption is that these
components make up the corporate brand equity and knowing these components may
give the opportunity to examine corporate brand equity in parts. The study examines
components of corporate brand equity especially in the environment of small and
medium-sized enterprises. The idea of components of corporate brand equity is a
totally new assumption about brand equity and thus justifications and theoretical
background on the topic as such are not found in the literature.
1.2 Justification of the importance of the research topic
This study is theoretically important for several reasons. Firstly, corporate branding
is a current topic of interest (e.g. de Chernatory 2002; Balmer & Greyser 2006), and
9
scholars have paid great attention to it since the mid-1990s (Balmer & Liao 2007).
As early as in 1990s, King (1991) stated the positioning of an organisation as a brand
more and more important, and still the area of research in corporate branding is
deficient. Distinctions between corporate branding and other branding categories and
areas are available (Balmer & Liao 2007). However, most of the studies about
corporate branding are based on the knowledge of product branding (Ahonen 2008).
It is important to study corporate branding more in order to be aware of the concept
and its distinctive features, especially because of the many advantages a corporate
brand may have.
Secondly, branding and brand equity have been widely investigated in large
organisations, but brand knowledge in SME environment is a fresh topic (Ahonen
2008). Only a limited amount of literature can be found on branding and brand
building in SMEs (e.g. Ojasalo, Nätti & Olkkonen 2008; Krake 2005), and several
studies acknowledge that very little or no research at all has been done within this
area of interest (e.g. Wong & Merrilees 2005; Merrilees 2007; Berthon, Ewing &
Napoli 2008; Ahonen 2008). Abimbola and Vallaster (2007) have found the role of
positive brand equity and reputation in SMEs as an important question and further
research area. Berthon et al. (2008) also mention that future research should be
directed towards brand management and its effects on brand equity. Furthermore,
corporate branding and brand equity are topics, which have not been widely, if at all,
connected to the SME literature and research.
Thirdly, the applying of large firm models to the context of small organisations has
been criticized (Gilmore, Carson & Grant 2001) and thus it is be important to build
models especially for small business environment, including the special features of
this particular phenomenon. According to Welsh and White (1981) in small
businesses the outlook of managers and the principles used must be different from
those of a big organisation. Ahonen (2008) suggests corporate branding issues to be
investigated and utilised more in the area of SMEs. According to her, corporate
branding has even become one of the recently most discussed phenomena.
There are also more practical reasons for studying corporate brand equity in the
environment of small and medium-sized enterprises. Corporate branding is for
10
example seen as an important source of competitive differentiation (Inskip 2004). It
is a resource, which can offer an organisation sustainable, competitive advantage,
and it can be critically important to multiple stakeholder groups (Balmer & Gray
2003). Besides its financial value, corporate brand can be beneficial and valuable to
the company when building a partnership or recruiting new employees (Balmer &
Gray 2003). Indeed, corporate brand seems to be a durable asset having a great
longevity. It is also a valuable asset because it is difficult to replicate and this way it
is not possible for a competitor to imitate the corporate brand. (Balmer & Gray
2003.) Therefore, it should be considered as a great advantage also in the long run.
In competitive markets, corporate branding can be seen as one of the most important
tasks of management (King 1991). A strong corporate brand can provide a number of
marketing advantages (Keller 2000, 133). But only if corporate brand equity is
carefully build and nurtured – a challenging task (Keller 2000, 135). Also according
to Boyle (2003) the value of the brand equity is the reason for being able to create
strong brands which offer remarkable competitive advantage.
Measuring and managing brand equity has become more and more consequential in
recent years and it is said to be one of the most important topics of marketing in
organisations (Cobb-Walgren, Ruble & Naveen 1995). Indeed, the interest in brand
equity and its development has increased and different interest groups set more value
on it (Ojasalo et al. 2008). With brand equity, an organisation may gain several
different advantages such as higher stock returns or purchase intentions (Pappu,
Quester & Cooksey 2005). In many organisations brand equity might even comprise
a big part of the value of the whole organisation and the impact of brand equity to the
market value of a company or a product may be significant. For example 55 % of the
market value of Coca-Cola was composed of brand equity in 1980. (Simon &
Sullivan 1993.)
In SMEs, a strong corporate brand seems to have been recognised as a means of
gaining new customers (Ojasalo et al. 2008). The amount of SMEs is larger than
other organisations, and they constitute the majority of organisations (e.g. Berthon et
al. 2008; Ojasalo et al. 2008). For example in European Union in 2004 in the non-
financial business economy 99.8 percentages of the organisations were small and
11
medium-sized organisations (Eurostat 2008). Thus it seems that it should also be
thought as an important area of research from the viewpoint of the society. The
advantages of small and medium-sized enterprises for the society are many,
including new innovations which SMEs bring to markets, SMEs operating as
catalysts in the society, creating new jobs and assisting in the overall economic
growth (Reijonen 2008).
Wong and Merrilees (2005) have concluded branding to be relevant for SMEs. If
branding is well-defined and incorporated, it can be a powerful and an enabling tool
for an SME (Merrilees 2007). With branding SMEs may be able to optimise their
business and specialise to the needs of target groups (Berthon et al. 2008) and have a
better chance in dynamic markets full of competition. According to Abimbola and
Kocak (2007), SMEs could also have the advantage of easier entry when introducing
new products or entering new markets. With branding SMEs can also create
associations, which cannot be easily copied by competitors (ibid.). Branding is a
means of differentiating and creating sustainable growth, which are both important to
small organisations for survival and success. With branding, SMEs may be able to
better separate themselves from competitors. Abimbola and Kocak (2007) argue that
with branding in market strategy, SMEs are able to positively influence performance
and competitiveness of the organisation. According to Inskip (2004), corporate
branding is as important to SMEs as it is to larger companies.
Also Abimbola and Vallaster (2007) highlight the importance of branding in
enterprises and small businesses as a critical factor in the success in competitive
markets. With scarce resources, it should be substantially important to investigate the
area of branding in SMEs. With limited resources, lack of reputation and customer
base, building a strong brand is a much more serious topic in SMEs (e.g. Boyle 2003;
Krake 2005) compared to larger organisations which may have better opportunities
to build strong brands due to the ability to use more resources to branding. Because
of the continuously and quickly changing markets, SMEs need to constantly look for
ways to be competitive and survive (Valkokari & Helander 2007). Concentrating on
branding and brand equity building can be seen as a solution for this. According to
Keller (2003, 752), with the limited resources of a small business, it could be
12
beneficial to concentrate on building a corporate brand in order to efficiently build
brand equity.
1.3 Purpose of the study
This study investigates components of corporate brand equity in small and medium-
sized enterprises from the viewpoint of the organisation. By doing this, the aim of the
study is to better understand corporate brand equity and its key components
especially in small and medium-sized enterprises. Branding has not been widely
investigated in SMEs and this study explores and clarifies the embodiment of the
components of corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises.
The subject is explored through one main and three sub research questions. The
questions are:
Main research question: What does corporate brand equity in SMEs constitute of?
First sub question: What are the internal components of corporate brand equity in
SMEs?
Second sub question: What are the external components of corporate brand equity in
SMEs?
Third sub question: What is the embodiment of these components in SMEs?
The main research question of the study is answered through the three sub research
questions. The first and the second sub research questions are aiming to clarify the
components of corporate brand equity in SMEs. The answer to these questions is
found through both, the theoretical and the empirical part of the study. In the
theoretical part the components are found from the previous literature concerning
corporate branding and branding in SMEs and the empirical part is used to support
and complete the findings from the theoretical part. The third sub research question is
answered through the empirical part of the study, as it reveals the previously
understudied phenomenon more deeply.
13
1.4 Key concepts
In academic research, it is important to define the concepts and their meaning in the
particular study. Concepts can have multiple meanings depending on the perspective.
Each individual may have different view of the concept. These views may also vary
in different circumstances and in time. In this chapter, the key concepts of this study
are described and explained. The concepts are described as they are viewed in this
study. The concepts are described more deeply in following chapters two and three.
Brand
Brands and branding can be defined in multiple ways and the definitions are usually
not identical. The brand can be defined differently according to the point of view and
situations in hand (Tuominen 2006). In this study the concept of brand is understood
as follows. The American Marketing Association (2009) identifies a brand as being
“a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them”, which has a goal
of distinguishing one seller’s goods or services and to differentiate them from
competitor’s products or services. Also Wood (2000) defines brands as a way of
separating oneself from competitors. In this study this view is not enough, since it
can be seen in the study that brands can refer also to corporations. Thus, the
definition above has to be supplemented with Keller’s (2003, 3-4) definition of a
brand meaning not only products and services, but also retail stores, persons,
organizations, places or even ideas. In other words, brand is a distinguishing
character or element of a product, service, store, person, organisation, place or idea.
It is also important to keep in mind that brand is an intangible asset (de Chernatory
2002).
Corporate brand
Knox and Bickerton (2003, 998) have defined corporate branding as ”the visual,
verbal and behavioural expression of an organisation’s unique business model”.
Corporate brand is the brand of the organisation and thus a wider concept compared
to traditional, product brand view. Corporate brand is more diverse concept, but it is
still a brand and can be understood through similar elements as traditional product
brand. The distinction between product brand and corporate brand is that corporate
14
brand can encompass a much wider range of associations (Keller 2000, 115). Thus,
corporate brand refers to the distinguishing elements of the organisation.
Brand equity
Brand equity is a concept with multiple and diversified meanings. One single
definition is hard, if even possible to be given. Nevertheless, it can be said that brand
equity is an element creating added value. It builds up only as a result of branding.
Brand equity may build up and be build up by comprehensive sound activities or
only by concentrating on certain areas of the branding or business. According to Pitta
and Katsanis (1995) literature on brand equity concentrates on two views: from the
financial viewpoint brand equity is the financial brand value; from consumer
perspective brand equity is examined as consumers’ behaviour and its impact on the
brand. Since this study relates to corporate branding, the perspective should be
widened. Thus, in this study brand equity is about external component, stakeholders’
views about the brand and its impact on the brand, as well as about the internal
components of the brand equity. This is referred to as corporate brand equity. These
internal and external components of the brand are discussed later on in the study.
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME)
According to European Union, the group of small and medium-sized enterprises
consist of micro-companies, small companies and middle-sized companies (Krake
2005). The number of employees in these categories varies from 1 to 250 employees
(ibid.). The commission of the European Communities (2003) has also recommended
small and medium-sized enterprises to have an annual turnover up to 50 million
euros, or a balance sheet total of no more than 43 million euros.
Core values
Core values are the guidelines for the organisation and its practices. They highlight a
few important elements of the organisation, its vision and mission. Core values
should be determined inside the organisation, usually by manager or the owner of the
organisation, possibly together with the personnel of the organisation.
15
1.5 Research method
The topic of this study is an under-researched area in branding and therefore the
study uses qualitative, theory building techniques to understand the phenomenon
better. The aim is towards theory development, rather than theory testing. With
qualitative research, the aim is to generate richer and more meaningful knowledge.
When the aim is to build further and richer understanding of the phenomenon and to
develop theoretical evidence, evidence-based approach can make data analysis more
fertile (Abimbola & Kocak, 2007).
This study and the theoretical framework are based on previous literature concerning
product and service branding, branding in SMEs and corporate branding as well as
brand equity and more general literature about SMEs. Since the area of research is
new, the adaptation from multiple sources is inevitable in order to be able to
construct a framework. Bernstein (2003) has noted that corporate branding is
subsumed in branding, and thus the basics of branding could be available to be used
also in the context of corporate branding. Also, it has been stated that the concepts of
product and service branding can be viewed as the same as corporate branding, and
only the enactment of these are different (de Chernatory 2002). In this study the
differences have been noted, and the framework is suitable in the context of
corporate branding, not necessarily in other branding categories such as product
branding.
The case company of this research is a small organisation concentrating on
environmental technology. Data was collected with three interviews which were done
during the spring 2009. Two of the interviews were done in the case company, EHP-
Tekniikka Ltd. The third interview was conducted with a customer. More detailed
description of the methods and the empirical research design follow in chapter four.
This study is part of the Corporate Branding (CoBra) research project of Marketing
Department of University of Oulu. The aim of the research is to understand and
clarify the role and importance of corporate branding especially in small and
medium-sized enterprises. Through the project this study can also benefit as it gives
the researcher an access to wider information about corporate branding through other
16
case companies and increases the knowledge about the topic through other studies in
the project.
1.6 Structure of the study
The study forms around six main chapters as is presented in Figure 1 (see page 17).
The first chapter introduced reader to the subject of the study and presented an
overall picture of the topic and this study. The research problem and research
questions were presented as well as the aim of the study. First chapter also shortly
introduced the research methodology and key concepts of the study. The second
chapter of the study overviews corporate branding and branding in SMEs based on
previous literature on the subjects. Third chapter includes more detailed discussion
about corporate branding in SMEs, especially concerning corporate brand equity in
SMEs. Finally in the end of third chapter the theoretical framework is formed and
presented.
A more specific clarification of the research methodology of this study is given in the
fourth chapter and after this the empirical research is being presented in chapter five.
The data collection and analysis are viewed, as well as the results of the empirical
part of the study. The conclusions of the study are presented in the final chapter. The
study is summed up, and in the last chapter managerial implications and further
research ideas are announced. Furthermore, limitations of the study are evaluated.
17
Introduction
Theoretical frameworkCorporate brand equity in SMEs
Theoretical researchCorporate brandingBranding in SMEs
Brand equity
Empirical research
Conclusions
Methodology
Introduction
Theoretical frameworkCorporate brand equity in SMEs
Theoretical researchCorporate brandingBranding in SMEs
Brand equity
Empirical research
Conclusions
Methodology
Figure 1. The structure of the study
18
2 CORPORATE BRANDING IN SMES
Corporate branding is a relatively new, current and more and more significant
perspective, as well is branding in SMEs. The aim of this chapter is to introduce the
reader more deeply to the world of corporate branding and branding in SMEs.
2.1 Corporate branding
Corporate branding can be seen as a systematically planned and executed process
which aims to create and maintain a positive image and reputation for the whole
organisation (Einwiller & Will 2002). This can be done by sending signals to all
interest groups and by managing the behaviour and communication as well as
symbolism of the whole organisation (ibid.). As Einwiller and Will argue, corporate
brand can be build, but the other aspect of it is that it will also develop whether
someone is building it up or not (Wong & Merrilees 2005).
Olins (2000) well argues for the importance and comprehensiveness of corporate
brand building. According to him, corporate brand building is about constructing a
new corporate belief system in the organisation. This can be build around products
looking and feeling different from those of competitors. Levels of service in the
organisation should be designed to support this and environments and
communication in the organisation can be carefully crafted to sustain the brand idea.
(Olins 2000, 60.) Even though Olins argues that the corporate brand should be build
around products, this is not the case in every situation, since the organisation might
not even have products, but instead for example services. What is important, though,
is that the organisation should try to differ from its competitors in some way.
According to Rode and Vallaster (2005) corporate branding includes the essence and
the purpose of the organisation, as well as the culture and character of it. It is a
strategic, focused and fully integrated process of the organisation. Rode and Vallaster
do not use the terms reputation and image, as do Einwiller and Will (2002), but they
say that corporate brand can be seen to constitute from two parts, the identity and the
image of the corporate brand (see figure 2). Corporate brand is the sum of corporate
identity and corporate image. Identity is the total sum of what the corporation is
19
about. It is the internal part of the brand, which includes for example the personnel of
the organisation. Corporate identity includes also the corporate culture, corporate
design, corporate behaviour and corporate communications. These aspects together
need to be in line. Corporate image, instead, is the picture of the corporation which
resides in the minds of the audience of the organisation, in other words it is the
external part of the brand. Corporate image is build in interaction with the audience
i.e. target groups of the organisation. Corporate image is an outcome of all the
communication between the organisation and its stakeholders. (Rode & Vallaster
2005.)
Target groups
ChannelsCustomerSupplierInvestorAnalystPublic
eg Social conduct,Employee behavior
Corporate image
External
Corporateidentity
Internal
Humanresources
Corporate design
Corporateculture/Personality
Corporate behavior
Corporate
communication
Mission statementValuesPhilosophy
AdvertisementSponsoringInternalCommunication
Trademark
Corporate brand
Target groups
ChannelsCustomerSupplierInvestorAnalystPublic
eg Social conduct,Employee behavior
Corporate image
External
Corporateidentity
Internal
Humanresources
Corporate design
Corporateculture/Personality
Corporate behavior
Corporate
communication
Mission statementValuesPhilosophy
AdvertisementSponsoringInternalCommunication
Trademark
Corporate brand
Figure 2. A holistic understanding of corporate branding (Rode 2004 via Rode & Vallaster 2005)
The model of corporate brand by Rode (2004) in figure 2 views well the wide
understanding of corporate brand. Indeed, corporate branding is about building the
brand with keeping mind the whole organisation, its operations and actions.
Corporate branding is about long gestation (Muzellec & Lambkin 2006) which
should be done by including the whole organisation, all the personnel, in the brand
building process (Bergstrom, Blumenthal & Crothers 2002). Part of the internal
corporate brand, corporate identity, are multiple elements such as the personnel,
20
values of the organisation and forms of communication (Rode & Vallaster 2005).
Managing the internal brand elements successfully should result in positive brand
reputation (Harris & de Chernatory 2001), in other words to positive image of the
organisation.
Balmer and Gray (2003) have defined corporate brand to be in many cases the face
of the organisation. The image a stakeholder has of the corporate brand is an
outcome of the sum of all the interactions and communications the stakeholder has
with the organisation (Davies & Chun 2002). Corporate communication is actually
forming the corporate image and the reputation of the organisation through
communicating the identity of the organisation to various stakeholder groups
(Balmer & Gray 1999). These information sources can be found many, and they form
the understanding of the stakeholder about the corporate brand (Balmer & Gray
1999). Especially since communication channels have diversified and the roles of
stakeholders are multiple and overlapping (Argenti & Druckenmiller 2004) the
influence of the whole organisation in branding should be kept in mind to have a
successful brand. Also, the boundaries between internal and external parts of the
organisation, the relationships between personnel and stakeholders, are nowadays
blurring, and the organisation is more transparent and accountable to external
stakeholder groups (Hatch & Schultz 1997).
Because of the diverse and complex environment of a corporation and the different
relationships it has to its interest groups, corporate brand should be a clear and
coherent message which is similar to every group of audience (Olins 2000, 60) to
take full advantage of the brand. Corporate branding is largely dependent on
perceptions, beliefs and experiences (Balmer & Gray 2003). This can also be seen as
a result of its diverse nature. As Keller (2000, 119) has said, corporate brand is not
only about the associations connected to a product, but it builds on every association
linked to the corporation. If a corporation has strong and powerful product brands,
the characters associated to these product brands may also affect the whole corporate
brand (Keller 2000, 133).
Einwiller and Will (2002) have also highlighted the importance of coherency in
communications by saying that it is needed in order to be able to generate a coherent
21
corporate image and reputation for the organisation. When the whole personnel of
the organisation is aware of the brand identity and its meaning, the actions will be
more coherent, enhancing and supporting the desired identity of the organisation
(Harris & de Chernatory 2001). When the identity of the organisation, the brand and
the reputation of the organisation are coherent with each other, branding has the
potential of being successful (Abimbola & Vallaster 2007).
Knox and Bickerton (2003) have expressed corporate branding as a continuous
process of seeking relevance and distinctiveness and this way guaranteeing its value.
The corporation as a brand has to manage itself to all its audiences (Olins 2000, 61).
Inskip (2004) mentions corporate branding in large organisations to usually include
consultations through the whole organisation, concept generation, research, key
stakeholder influence and agreement, execution of the concept and finally a
manifestation of the whole process in terms of all visual and verbal areas of the
business. This kind of process is a time consuming as well as costly (ibid.).
2.1.1 The foundation of corporate brand
Hatch and Schultz (2003) see corporate brand as constituting from three elements:
strategic vision, organisational culture and corporate images (see figure 3). Vision is
about what the organisation and its central idea is and what the organisation wants to
be, and it is usually an outcome of what are the thoughts of the manager or owner of
the organisation. Culture relates to internal dimensions of the organisation and
communicating the meaning of the organisation to its members, and the images are
the views of the stakeholder groups about the organisation. (Hatch & Schultz 2003.)
Thus the model includes three important factors of corporate branding, which are the
management, employees and stakeholder groups.
22
Figure 3. Foundation of corporate branding (Hatch & Schultz 2003)
All in all, these three elements, culture, vision and image, separately from each other
may not constitute a successful corporate brand, but the attention should instead be
paid to the relationship of the elements. These elements form the corporate brand and
all together they should be in line with the desired outcome of corporate branding.
The promise the brand makes and the performance of the organisations should also
be in line to success in branding. (Hatch & Schultz 2003.) Trueman, Klemm and
Girourd (2004) agree with this by saying that in corporate branding the link between
the actual identity and communicated identity must be honest, and the two should be
corresponding for the brand to be successful. In other words, corporate brand should
be internally and externally congruent and continuous communication between these
interfaces should exist (de Chernatory 2002).
Corporate branding can be seen to be an interactive, dynamic and continuous process
between the organisation and its stakeholder groups. According to de Chernatory
(2002), the core of the brand consists of the core values specified by management.
Boyle (2003) has investigated brand building in the area of entrepreneurship, and
according to her the brand can be build on its values. According to Olins (2000, 60)
the organisations’ reputation is seen to depend on the values of the corporate brand.
Urde (2003) has also stated that branding can be based on core values. Mission,
vision and organisational values are brought together in the form of core values
(Urde 2003). Personnel of the organisation are enacting these values to customers,
which interpret and redefine them. This reflects to managers’ behaviour and views of
the brand and its values. A strong brand is only possible when these stages are in
23
harmony: managerially defined values, the implementation of them by personnel and
customer appreciation of the values. According to Rode and Vallaster (2005) values
should be consistently communicated internally and externally to have a successful
brand. (de Chernatory 2002.)
As said, corporate brand can be built on core company values (e.g. Hatch & Schultz
2003; Urde 2003). Stakeholder groups should be able to identify with the corporate
brand and its values if the brand is wanted to be successful. An example of corporate
branding working is when recognisable and expressed values and symbols of an
organisation attract stakeholders to the organisation and make them feel as part of
belonging to the organisation (Hatch & Schultz 2003). For the corporate brand to
distinguish from the brands of others, corporate brand values should be distinguished
from the competitors, and this can be done by creating a distinctive brand image.
(Kollmann & Suckow 2007.)
According to Rode and Vallaster (2005), corporate culture is at the core of the
corporate identity. Thus, the culture is also affecting the brand. Corporate culture
includes corporate core values, but it is a wider concept (Rode & Vallaster 2005). It
is about practicing the values of the organisation. Thus, culture is strongly embedded
in the organisational behaviour. If values and culture are coherent the performance
the organisation delivers and the promise the brand makes are in line with each other.
This means that the members of the organisation, personnel, are strongly related to
the culture of the organisation and its contribution. (Hatch & Schultz 2003.)
The culture of the organisation should support the meaning of the corporate brand. If
this happens, organisational culture may be a source of competitive advantage. Thus,
culture should be also supporting the core values of the organisation. (Hatch &
Schultz 2003.)
2.1.2 Characteristics of corporate branding compared to product branding
Most literature on the subject suggests that there is a notable difference between
corporate and product branding (e.g. Muzellec, Doogan & Lambkin 2003; Balmer
2001). This section is aiming to clarify and mention some of these differences
24
supposedly crucial to corporate brand equity building. Comparison is made to
product branding in order to understand corporate branding better.
Corporate brand differs from product brand in its extent. Corporate brand
encompasses a much wider audience and is based on wider range of associations.
(Keller 2000, 115.) Corporate brand is directed not only to customers, but to other
groups as well. The audience of a corporation consists of for example employees,
shareholders, the financial community, suppliers and collaborators, governments and
other regulatory bodies. These different groups may be attached to the corporation in
many ways: suppliers may also be collaborators or customers etc. Also, according to
King (1991), these groups have different interpretations of what is evaluated as
important. (Olins 2000, 60.)
As corporate branding is not only customer oriented (Balmer & Gray 2003),
consumers are not the leading power of corporate brand, but instead it is in the
responsibility of the manager and his or her ability to see the opportunities of the
brand both inside and outside the organisation (de Chernatory 2002). Inside the
corporation, the responsibility of the brand should be on the manager or the owner,
not on for example the brand manager, as is the case often with product branding
(Leitch & Richardson 2003). Concerning corporate branding, there are also multiple
communication channels (Balmer & Gray 2003). A corporate brand has many contact
points and the diversity of the contact is wider than in classical product branding. In
the interface of contact are employees, the community in general, shareholders,
government, journalists, customers and many other groups related to the
organisation. Communication occasions can range from the most personal, face-to-
face contacts to contacts through general publicity. (King 1991.)
The scope of corporate branding is much wider compared to product branding, for
example every department of the organisation are responsible for the brand, not only
the marketing department. Also a much wider range of dimensions needs to be
thought of when building a corporate brand. (e.g. King 1991; Balmer & Gray 2003.)
Multiple aspects of the corporation should be included to build a successful brand.
The focus of branding is not on one particular product, but on the whole organisation
(Hatch & Schultz 2003). In corporate brand building, internal factors of the
25
organisation, such as employees and their affection are more tightly related to the
process (Harris & de Chernatory 2001). Organisation-wide support is needed in
building a corporate brand along with the audiences to whom the brand is targeted at
(Hatch & Schultz 2003). Also, since the corporate brand building is about the whole
organisation and its meaning, the focus is more strategic compared to product
branding (Motion, Leitch & Brodie 2003).
The management of corporate branding is management of the internal and external
areas of the organisation, much wider from that of product branding. Thus, not every
aspect of the corporate brand is in the direct influence of the management (Hatch &
Schultz 2003). Corporate brand constitutes from multiple dimensions and in the
influence of different target groups, and this is not possible to be managed wholly.
But as a counterbalance, in corporate branding the networks of the organisation can
be harnessed to a strong and even differentiating element (Knox & Bickerton 2003).
Thus, feedback can be used in corporate brand building, and feedback process can be
developed to a two-way process between the organisation and its stakeholder groups.
Table 1 below sums up some important differences concerning corporate and product
branding.
Table 1. Differences between product branding and corporate branding
On owner or managerOn brand managerThe responsibility of the brand
On the whole organisation, more strategic view
On product(s)The focus of branding
Whole organisation involvedUsually responsibility on marketing department
The scope of branding
Multiple contact pointsCustomersCommunication towards
Manager of the organisationCustomersLeading power of branding
Multiple target groups, multiple stakeholders
CustomersOrientation towards
Corporate brandingProduct branding
On owner or managerOn brand managerThe responsibility of the brand
On the whole organisation, more strategic view
On product(s)The focus of branding
Whole organisation involvedUsually responsibility on marketing department
The scope of branding
Multiple contact pointsCustomersCommunication towards
Manager of the organisationCustomersLeading power of branding
Multiple target groups, multiple stakeholders
CustomersOrientation towards
Corporate brandingProduct branding
26
2.2 Branding in SMEs
Abimbola and Vallaster (2007) have argued that branding is one of the critical factors
in the success of smaller organisations. Nevertheless, branding has not been largely
investigated in the context of small and medium-sized enterprises (Ahonen 2008).
Therefore, the aim of this chapter is to point out some differences SMEs face in
branding compared to larger organisations as well as some important aspects of
branding in SMEs. The comparison between larger and smaller organisations is made
here in order to understand branding in smaller organisations better and to find those
characteristics typical and important in branding a smaller organisation.
2.2.1 Differences between SMEs and larger organisations
Abimbola and Kocak (2007) recognise the many similarities SMEs have with larger
companies, but they also highlight some important differences concerning these two
environments. The approach of SMEs to branding differs from the one with larger
companies in many ways. In SMEs, brand is the key factor affecting reputation of a
company, and reputation is also strongly affecting the brand. The brand building
process in SMEs is typically more integrative than in larger companies. This means
that the whole company is responsible for the brand. (Abimbola & Kocak 2007.)
Compared to large companies SMEs may have a recognisable advantage because of
their more flexible structures and processes (Abimbola & Vallaster 2007). Dynamic
markets demand for flexible strategies, and SMEs may have the possibility to
maintain these. In SMEs the reactions are possible to be made faster and easier than
in larger organisations. Ojasalo et al. (2008) have found that this is recognised in
SMEs and due to this the content of brand should not be too detailed. Abimbola and
Kocak (2007) also note that in SMEs the brand building should be an interactive
process in addition with innovative development. According to Krake (2005), SMEs
have the advantage over larger companies with their flexibility, speed of reaction and
decision making and the eye for (market) opportunities. For instance decision
making can be much more quickly handled in smaller organisations.
27
SMEs have significant limitations with their budgets (Abimbola & Vallaster 2007)
and they have fever resources compared to bigger organisations (e.g. Abimbola &
Kocak 2007; Ahonen 2008). Limitations of resources in the organisation often relate
to both time and money (Berthon et al. 2008), but also to the lack of capacity, that is
personnel quantity (Krake 2005), as well as to lack of marketing knowledge, lack of
specialist expertise and to limited impact in the marketplace (Gilmore et al. 2001).
Therefore, resources for brand building in SMEs are very narrow (e.g. Wong &
Merrilees 2005; Ojasalo et al. 2008). Because of the lack of resources, management
in small business requires different approaches from those in bigger organisations
(Welsh & White 1981). Due to limited resources, SMEs should concentrate on
developing creative, targeted and inexpensive approaches for branding, instead of
large-scale PR (Ojasalo et al. 2008). According to Wong and Merrilees (2005), SMEs
can focus on certain potential areas in brand building instead of trying to control the
whole area of branding. Regardless of the limited budgets, SMEs can creatively
manage and leverage their brands (Berthon et al. 2008).
Concerning the different levels of branding (e.g. product and corporate branding), in
SMEs it is not often possible to separate these different levels (Ojasalo et al. 2008).
Empirical research has shown that small organisations realise their limited resources
and understand that it may not be possible to build product and company brands
separately (Ojasalo et al. 2008). Merrilees (2007) has noted that due to lack of
resources, SMEs can focus on just one or two brands, for example corporate brand,
and run well defined and targeted campaigns. Also Krake (2005) recommends SMEs
to concentrate on building only one strong brand. The reason to concentrate on
corporate branding instead of product branding is that with corporate branding the
organisation may reach wider audience and the corporate brand can be leveraged
more (Merrilees 2007).
Ojasalo et al. (2008) have investigated brand building in SMEs in the context of
software business. Their findings argue that the role of partners is important for
SMEs in creating brand name, for without proper partners the naming is both
difficult and time-consuming. Another difference concerning branding in small and
large organisations, as Krake (2005) argues, is that the influence of the entrepreneur
or the leader in smaller organisations is much greater and more direct. Also the brand
28
is more integrated with the leader in SMEs (ibid.). Different from larger
organisations and their influence and abilities to influence, market is often dictating
SMEs (Krake 2005). They are more dependent on the market and also guided by it.
Also, SMEs have only a small share of the market (Abimbola & Kocak 2007). In all,
SMEs are not usually capable of influencing the market.
The following table 2 aggregates the differences between SMEs and larger
organisations. A few similarities between the two environments are global and
information rich economies, competitive markets which are led by intangibility and
rapid innovation diffusions (Abimbola & Kocak 2007). The characteristics of larger
organisations as such do not play critical role in this study and since the analysis of
them is left aside. As can be seen from the table, differences exist. What is important
in the light of this study is the characteristics and viewpoint of SMEs.
Table 2. Differences between SMEs and larger organisations
- Limited teams- Lack of possibilities for specialists and professional services- Lack of resources-More integrative brand building process- Flexibility- Ability to fast decision making- Fast reaction speed- Branding may be an informal process- Limited impact on markets- Influence of the owner/manager strong
Small organisations
- More capacity to use and build teams- Specialists as employees, ability to buy professional services- More resources- Brand building often in the responsibility of certain employees, managers and/or teams- Formal brand building processes- More impact on markets
Differences
- Global and information rich economies- A competitive market- Rapid innovation diffusion
Similarities
Largeorganisations
- Limited teams- Lack of possibilities for specialists and professional services- Lack of resources-More integrative brand building process- Flexibility- Ability to fast decision making- Fast reaction speed- Branding may be an informal process- Limited impact on markets- Influence of the owner/manager strong
Small organisations
- More capacity to use and build teams- Specialists as employees, ability to buy professional services- More resources- Brand building often in the responsibility of certain employees, managers and/or teams- Formal brand building processes- More impact on markets
Differences
- Global and information rich economies- A competitive market- Rapid innovation diffusion
Similarities
Largeorganisations
29
2.2.2 Characteristics of branding in SMEs
Often small organisations lack the knowledge base of branding. Supposedly due to
this branding in SMEs may often be an informal process with no record of it
(Abimbola & Kocak 2007). Small organisations may not think of themselves as
brands or if they do, brand knowledge and management is not used in daily
operations (e.g. Merrilees 2007; Krake 2005). Inskip (2004) has sketched the process
of branding in SMEs to be often controlled by a single person’s vision supported by
only few key contributors. Usually SMEs do not have a marketing department at all,
and the support of corporate branding management at a functional level does not
exist (ibid.). Due to the central role of the manager or the owner of the organisation,
the marketing and thus also branding of the organisation may be haphazard and
informal (Gilmore et al. 2001).
If branding is an issue in SMEs, it may often have too general and non-specific goals
and the goals may not be well, but rather be fuzzy and poorly defined. This is due to
lack of skills and resources (Wong & Merrilees 2005). It seems that in SMEs the
orientation of the business is to increase sales and this determines the character of
their marketing (Krake 2005). The most important goal is often to gain growth in
turnover (ibid.). Thus, the long term goal of brand recognition may not have as
strong role in the SMEs as in larger organisations. SMEs may have a narrow view on
brand building, which may be seen to build up only with advertising and by choosing
a logo and a name for the brand (e.g. Wong & Merrilees 2005; Ojasalo et al. 2008).
Krake (2005) implies that in SMEs the most commonly used marketing
communication tools are word-of-mouth, newspaper advertisements, brochures and
PR exercises. Ojasalo et al. (2008) have also mentioned word-of-mouth as an
important part of the communication in SMEs, and they highlight the use of
customer references as a means of communicating. It seems that the Internet and its
potential have also been fully recognised in SMEs (Krake 2005). According to
Ojasalo et al. (2008) the Internet has even a strategic role because of the information
gathering by customers.
30
According to Krake (2005) the branding in SMEs should be about cultivating a
passion for the brand in the whole organisation in order to succeed in branding.
Communication of the brand should be consistent (Krake 2005), as has noted also
Ahonen (2008) by saying that coherency in all corporate communications is seen as
important for supporting the reputation of the organisation.
2.3 Actors in corporate branding in SMEs
According to previous literature on the subject, corporate brand building demands
not only management commitment but the investment of the whole organisation and
its actors and the brand building process to be cross-sectional across the whole
organisation. This might be more easily executed in an SME environment due to the
size of the organisation. Corporate branding as an interactive process with the
company and its audience may avail SMEs, who traditionally lack the resources, but
to whom interaction is more easily accessible (Ahonen 2008). In fact, in small
organisations the brand of the corporation should be effectively and consistently
communicated to all stakeholders, including for example customers, suppliers and
financiers, in order to build and improve the brand equity (Merrilees 2007).
2.3.1 The role of the manager
Typically the entrepreneur, owner, manager or the founder of a SME is a key person
and has a central and unifying position in the firm (Abimbola & Vallaster 2007). The
central person of the company is usually responsible for day-to-day decision making
and decision making at large, approach to business, and is also strongly
characterising the organisational culture and the management of the organisation
(e.g. Abimbola & Vallaster 2007; Berthon et al. 2008). According to Krake (2005),
when building a brand of a SME the owner of the company is most likely to have an
important role. The entrepreneur may even be seen as the brand (Ojasalo et al. 2008)
and the brand may even be built on the personality of the founder (e.g. Inskip 2004;
Krake 2005). According to Aaker (1996, 127) the manager or owner of the
organisation can be used as a personification of the brand, that is personalising the
corporation. This may for example foster in building relationships with customers,
but in this context it can be seen as promoting the relationship building with
31
stakeholders (ibid.). Krake (2005) has suggested small organisations to ensure that
there is a clear link between the character of the entrepreneur or leader and the
character of the brand.
In corporate branding, the manager or owner of the organisation is the corporate
brand manager (Balmer & Liao 2007) and his or her role has indeed been stressed in
the literature (Balmer & Gray 2003). For example, King (1991) mentions that the
management of the brand should start from the top of the organisation and the
manager or owner is the person who should lead people responsible for the brand.
Thus, the corporate brand management requires top management’s ideas about what
the company is and what it wants to be (Hatch & Schultz 2003). That is more
strategic management of the organisation (ibid.). For the corporate brand to be able
to renew and change when required, the role of management is inevitable (Knox &
Bickerton 2003). In SMEs, it seems that all the elements of corporate identity
develop around the leader or founder of the organisation. This means that the leader
is strongly affecting the corporate culture, corporate design, corporate
communication and corporate behaviour. Consequently, the leader is the role model
of the brand. (Abimbola & Vallaster 2007.)
Since the highest management level is responsible for the brand and its management,
the owner or the leader of the company decides about branding matters. As a central
person and even the personification of the brand, the owner or manager is also the
key person in communicating the brand to the outside world (Krake 2005).
According to Krake this is more common in smaller organisations because of the
greater influence of the owner and the close integration between the brand and the
owner. The manager or owner is also often the person clients or customers want to
contact (Gilmore et al. 2001). Manager or owner of the organisation is representing
and expressing the organisation and its associations (Aaker 1996, 127). Merrilees
(2007) mentions the use of the entrepreneur in public relations is supported as a way
of branding in SMEs. Owner or entrepreneur with good reputation or good brand is
able to increase the chance of financial support for the organisation as well as
influence the relationships with customers and suppliers. Personal qualities of the
entrepreneur may even be used to increase credibility. (Merrilees 2007.)
32
The manager is not able to manage every aspect of the corporate brand, but
sensitivity towards the images that target groups’ form of the organisation will help
in building and maintaining the corporate brand (Hatch & Schultz 2003). The
diversity of the communication in corporate branding demands attention from
management (King 1991). Due to the large scope of corporate branding, the
management of it is a challenging task, but the aim of this should nevertheless be to
build and manage a coherent and consistent corporate brand which includes every
aspect of the organisation (ibid.). All the value-adding elements of corporate brand
should be coordinated in order to be able to deliver integrated brands (de Chernatory
2002). This includes for instance the management of personnel. The approach in
management should be more flexible and less hierarchical, including more informal
networking, since this enables rapid response to the corporate brand (King 1991).
Also, initiative should be emboldened (ibid.).
The use of specialists in a SME is not common (Berthon et al. 2008). Small
businesses do not usually have the resources to such professional services as
bookkeeping (Welsh & White 1981) and positions such as marketing chief, which are
more usual in bigger organisations. Therefore, managers of a small organisation
should have a broad thinking of a generalist and be able to switch from role to role in
the organisation (Welsh & White 1981). Also according to Gilmore et al. (2001)
owners and managers of a SME are usually generalists and not specialists. The
previous experiences, skills, characteristics and motivations of the manager seem to
have an impact on the success of a SME (Watson, Hogarth-Scott & Wilson 1998),
thus it seems that the role of manager is also important in corporate branding. Since
the corporate identity builds around the manager of the organisation, his or her
characteristics and personality are linked with the identity (Abimbola & Vallaster
2007).
2.3.2 The role of personnel
Both, the literature on corporate branding and the literature on branding in SMEs
highlight the important role of personnel in brand building (see e.g. de Chernatory &
Cottam 2008; King 1991; Balmer & Gray 2003; Ojasalo et al. 2008). For instance
King has emphasized the role of personnel in corporate branding as early as 1991,
33
when the term corporate brand did not even exist, at least at the same breadth as
nowadays. According to King, the choice of buying a brand has everything to do
with the people behind the company, personnel. Behaviour, skills, attitudes, design,
style, language, communication and many more aspects of personnel will affect the
buying decision maker (King 1991). Particularly those employees, who are in
interaction with stakeholders, affect the reputation of the organisation and the
perceptions of stakeholders with their behaviour (Davies & Chun 2002). This means
that the entire culture of the organisation affects the brand choice.
Empirical research has also shown that the role of personnel is important in the brand
building process of a SME. Lack of commitment and resistance to change emerge if
the personnel of the organisation are not involved. Also, the understanding of the
brand and its goals should be clear within the organisation and its employees for the
brand to succeed. Davies and Chun (2002) note that stakeholders may form their
perceptions about the corporate image through employee behaviour, and thus the
perceptions of personnel should be matching with those of stakeholders. (Ojasalo et
al. 2008.)
Corporate branding can be a goal for the whole organisation, meaning that everyone
can participate in cultivating the brand (Wong & Merrilees 2005). To succeed,
everyone in the organisation should be aware of the meaning of the brand and the
brand should be lived by the employees (ibid.). Commitment from every employee in
the organisation is needed in order to success in corporate brand building (Balmer &
Gray 2003). If employees are aware of the brand’s purpose they are in this way able
to be inspired and understand how their roles relate to the brand (Harris & de
Chernatory 2001). It is said that the brand should be explained throughout the whole
organisation, to every member of the personnel, and reactions of the personnel
should be taken into account when creating and maintaining the brand (King 1991).
According to de Chernatory (2002), personnel are the embodiment of the corporate
brand, one of the key stakeholder groups an organisation has. Personnel should be
committed to delivering the brand promise in order for the brand to succeed. It seems
that this is important to be noted even in the recruiting process, since personnel are
reflecting, contributing to, and presenting the corporate brand and their individual
34
skills and values affect these phases (King 1991). It should be noted that the personal
values the personnel have, have an impact on the brand values. If the personnel
understand what the brand is about, they are able to behave accordingly. (de
Chernatory 2002.) Not only employees’ values, but also their behaviour can have an
effect to brand’s values. Therefore managers should, after defining brand values, also
ensure that employees’ values are in consistency with brand values. This can be done
by including also employees in the defining of brand values. (Harris & de Chernatory
2001.)
Since the core values have an important role in the corporate brand building, it could
be indeed important to acknowledge the role of employees’ values as well. According
to Davies and Chun (2002) the values of the personnel should be in line with the
values of the organisation and the brand for the brand to succeed. This also means
that the image and identity of the organisation and the brand should be consistent
with each other in order to the values be aligned (ibid.). When the organisation and
its personnel have shared values, it leads to perceiving the brand similarly and the
personnel are able to communicate the brand consistently (Harris & de Chernatory
2001). This means that the personnel and the organisation should agree which are the
values guiding communications and behaviour.
The personnel of the company as a whole are seen to be the ones communicating the
brand to the outside world (e.g. Harris & de Chernatory 2001; Balmer & Liao 2007).
Nevertheless, the personnel are not only communicating about the brand, but even
their behaviour may affect the corporate brand (Balmer & Gray 2003). Employees
are the ones building relationships with stakeholders, as well as, with their behaviour
and communication, communicating and building up the meaning of the brand
(Hatch & Schultz 2003). Due to the nature of corporate branding, which enables
organisations to build relationships, stakeholders have the ability to relate to the
organisation through its personnel, which is easier than to relate to objects such as
products (Aaker 1992a).
35
2.3.3 The role of stakeholders, relationships and networks
Corporate branding builds up interactively with the impact of the organisation and its
stakeholders (Leitch & Richardson 2003). Also according to Ahonen (2008),
corporate branding is not only a systematically planned process of the organisation,
but it indeed evolves in interaction between the organisation and all its stakeholders.
The organisation alone is not building the corporate brand, but it does it together with
stakeholder groups of the organisation. Two key stakeholder groups of an
organisation are its personnel and their customers (de Chernatory 2002). Corporate
brand is nevertheless not affected only by customer images about the brand, but all
the stakeholders the organisation has have an impact on corporate branding (Hatch &
Schultz 2003). These stakeholder groups include employees, customers, investors,
suppliers, partners, regulators, local communities and special interests (ibid.).
According to the organisation and its current situation, some stakeholders are more
important than others (Einwiller & Will 2002).
In SMEs, relationships and cooperation are seen as important elements concerning
brand building. Brands can be strengthened with cooperation and communication
with a bigger and known actor in the markets and also good relationships within the
delivery channel are seen important. Stakeholders can even be seen as partners of the
organisation, working together in problem-solving (Halal 2000). For example co-
operation with a bigger and well-known organisation can be a reference and increase
credibility of the smaller organisation. Relationships with the press are also seen as
important to build. (Ojasalo et al. 2008.)
Also Abimbola and Vallaster (2007) acknowledge the importance of relationships.
They argue that personal relationships or contacts with the audience may be the most
important sources of information for the organisation. This leads to better
possibilities of an SME to react on the experiences and associations the brand has
with audience. Also Valkokari and Helander (2007) have noticed that in SMEs
relationships are usually personal. In dynamic environment demanding innovation
and being competitive, SMEs may exploit strategic co-operation and networks
(ibid.). With the relationships to its customers, an organisation is able to co-construct
its brand(s) and use customers as a resource to extend and strengthen brand equity
36
(Merrilees 2007). In SMEs, manager is often trying to network with customers and
potential customers (Gilmore et al. 2001).
To SME owners and managers networking actually seems to be natural and they
often base their decision making on the networks. Marketing is also done through
networking, in other words this means that the manager communicates about the
organisation in many ways. From the SME perspective, networking can be seen as a
competence of the manager, which is able to be learned and developed. According to
Valkokari and Helander (2007), in small business environment the networks are
based on personal relationships. Communication exists, more widely than literature
has reported, also between competitors. Nevertheless, the co-operation with
competitors is done in a cautious way and speaking too freely is being avoided.
(Gilmore et al. 2001.)
Chapter two has revealed some important aspects of corporate branding and branding
in SMEs. Corporate branding differs from product branding for instance in its extent,
leading power and the focus on which branding concentrates to. Corporate brand is
lead by the manager of the organisation and it is communicated towards multiple
stakeholders. Differences between smaller and larger organisations deal with for
example capacity, resources and impact on markets. In SMEs the influence of the
owner or manager is great, and the organisation may have an advantage over larger
organisations for example in its ability to fast decision making. In branding in SMEs,
the personnel and stakeholders are also influencing the branding and thus corporate
brand equity. Chapter three discusses about corporate brand equity in SMEs.
37
3 CORPORATE BRAND EQUITY IN SMES
In this chapter the concept of brand equity is being clarified and related to the
corporate environment as corporate brand equity. It should be kept in mind that
definitions of brand equity are based on product and/or service branding. For
clarification, it is seen important to first understand the basis of the concept and thus
such attention in this research is paid first on the concept in this area. In this study
the brand equity is related to corporate brand, and a wider understanding of the
concept is going to follow later on. Finally, in the end of the chapter the theoretical
framework is presented.
3.1 Clarification of the brand equity concept
Brand valuation is an area of research with diversity. The terms used in the literature
vary between researchers and the purposes of them, and there seems to be no single
definition about the concepts and their meaning (e.g. Wood 2000; Mackay 2001;
Keller 2003, 42). The concepts of brand value and brand equity have not been
accurately defined and every researcher seems to have his or her own definition and
opinion about the concepts (Winters 1991). Also, the meaning of the terms is and has
been influenced by the fact that branding is researched not only in the area of
marketing, but also by the accounting domain (e.g. Wood 2000; Tuominen 2006; El-
Tawy & Tollington 2008).
The concepts of brand value and brand equity are not only blurry, but have been used
crosswise, that is the meanings of the concepts are disorganised and interchanging.
Also the language used seems to affect the understanding of the concepts1. All in all,
brand equity seems to be the term used more frequently in the literature, but in a
variety of ways and in different publications it may mean either the financial value of
the brand (see e.g. Biel 1992; Simon & Sullivan 1993) or the asset-based, intangible
properties of the brand (see e.g. Aaker 1992b, 216; Lassar, Mittal & Sharma 1995;
Pitta & Katsanis 1995; Berry 2000).
1 The terms used in finnish are often translated as follows: brand equity is brändipääoma, brand value is brändin arvo. However, brand equity is also referred to as brändin arvo. (Tuominen 2006.)
38
Nevertheless it seems that the wider view in the marketing literature sees brand
equity from the marketing viewpoint and it has been used more often in this
meaning, as an intangible asset which has something to do with for example
associations. According to Keller (2003, 42) there seems to be an agreement in the
marketing literature that the concept of brand equity should be defined with the help
of the uniquely attributable marketing effects which a brand has. Therefore, brand
value is more of a financial concept, meaning the financial value of the brand,
measurable in money. Brand value can be defined for example as the incremental
earnings and cash flows of a brand (Murphy 1989 via Kerin & Sethuraman 1998).
In other words, as El-Tawy and Tollington (2008) have noted, in the marketing
domain brand equity is seen as an asset, and not only an accounting term relating to
the financial value. Or as Murphy has stated, brand equity is the intangible brand
properties of the brand (Murphy 1989 via Kerin & Sethuraman 1998). Also in this
study the concepts are seen from this view.
Aaker has defined brand equity as follows: “brand equity is a set of brand assets and
liabilities linked to a brand’s name and symbol that add to or subtract from the value
provided by a product or service to a firm and/or that firm’s customers.” These assets
vary according to the context. (Aaker 1992b, 216.)
Marketing Science Institute defines brand equity as associations and behaviour of
consumers, channel members or parent company of the brand, with which the brand
is able to earn greater volume or greater margins than without the brand name. These
associations and behaviour forges the brand a stable, strong and differentiating
advantage compared to its competitors. Brand Equity Board on the other hand
defines brand equity as original, trustworthy, current and special promise which the
brand offers to consumers. (Keller 2003, 43.)
When thinking about the concept of brand equity, it should also be important to keep
in mind the many levels it has. Brand equity may be increased and created for a
brand in many ways (Keller 2000, 42). Also, there are many ways to exploit brand
equity (ibid.).
39
3.2 Corporate brand equity
Brand equity is a concept which has not been clarified in the field of corporate world.
This chapter collects together the few notions about corporate brand equity.
Keller (2000, 115) defines corporate brand equity in the following words: ”the
differential response by consumers, customers, employees, other firms or any
relevant constituency to the words, actions, communications, products or services
provided by an identified corporate brand entity”. In other words, corporate brand
equity is the sum of results formed by any action made under the corporation and its
brand. Positive corporate brand equity is build up by promoting the corporate brand
to targeted and/or relevant audience (Keller 2000, 115). Every action the corporation
makes, affects its brand equity. Merrilees (2007) has noted that by efficiently and
coherently communicating the brand to all its stakeholder groups the organisation is
able to maximise brand equity.
Corporate brand equity builds on strong, favourable, and unique associations about
the corporate brand (Keller 2000, 115). Every intangible association may improve
and affect corporate brand equity. Different brand elements may gain different roles
and affect corporate brand equity in different ways and in different degree. This
means that there is not only one correct way to build corporate brand equity.
Nevertheless, every brand element at every level of the brand hierarchy may increase
corporate brand equity by creating awareness and building strong, unique and
favourable associations. (Keller 2000, 125.)
According to Keller (2000, 118-120) corporate brand equity builds on the grounds of
corporate image and the dimensions of corporate image affect corporate brand equity.
Corporate image is about products of the organisation, the actions an organisation
takes and the manner in which the organisation communicates. Corporate image
associations may also be affected by the characteristics of the personnel of the
organisation. The whole organisation affects the perceptions about corporate brand
and all the actions of the organisation are involved in this perception-making.
According to Hatch and Schultz (2003) the images, in the minds of stakeholders, of
the organisation as attractive and desirable are expected to influence stakeholder
40
behaviour in ways that create corporate brand equity. This means that the
organisation should build such associations (ibid.). (Keller 2000, 118-120.)
What the organisation does and on what it particularly concentrates in its operation
affects corporate brand equity. The organisation has a relationship with the products
or services it offers and thus the corporate brand should represent all of these to
positively affect its corporate brand equity. Also the internal management of the
brand is important in corporate branding, since every employee can directly or
indirectly have an impact on brand equity. In addition, the internal management may
advance the external brand management. (Keller 2000, 130-135.)
According to Keller there are two potentially useful marketing communication
strategies to build brand equity at the corporate brand level: corporate image
campaigns and brand line campaigns. Corporate image campaigns are the ways of
creating associations to the corporate brand as a whole. Some possible objectives of
these campaigns may be for example to build the awareness of the organisation, to
create favourable attitudes towards credibility of the organisation or to motive
present personnel. These are tools for increasing corporate brand equity. Brand line
campaigns instead are about emphasizing the breadth of products associated with the
corporate brand. (Keller 2000, 131-133.)
As has been noted already, corporate brand should be effectively and consistently
communicated to all stakeholders in order to be able to build brand equity. According
to Rode and Vallaster (2007) every interaction with the stakeholders affects brand
equity and increases it as the more positive the experience, the stronger is the brand
and the more the organisation has positive reputation. Abimbola and Vallaster (2007)
agree with this by arguing the importance of every interaction of the company with
its customers and other stakeholders. Every interaction affects the corporate brand
equity and has the possibility to make it stronger (ibid.). Corporate brand equity may
also be build with activity which is not directly related to the brand, such as charity
or environmentally concerned actions (Keller 2000, 121).
Kollmann and Suckow (2007) have argued that in corporate brand equity building
the brand name has even more meaning than in product branding. This is because of
41
the wider audience and the need for the brand name to deliver consistent information
about the brand. According to them, brand name is the driver for building brand
equity. Also, in the words of Muzellec and Lambkin (2006, 807), “the name is the
anchor for brand equity”. Urde (2003) instead highlights the role of core values in
corporate branding by saying that the factors linking core values and the corporate
brand are pivotal for corporate brand equity building and thus the goal should be to
define unique and useful core values which are difficult for competitors to imitate.
Also, Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) have noted that the sources of corporate brand
equity may not constitute only from corporate brand, but also from other brand
hierarchy layers. (Kollmann & Suckow 2007.)
3.3 The formation of corporate brand equity in SMEs
Corporate brand equity management is about managing corporate image, vision and
culture in line. In order to success, corporate brand should be coherent and
integrated, in other words the image and the identity of the corporate brand should be
matching. The messages sent to stakeholders should deliver the same view the
personnel of the organisation have about the organisation. That is, the actual identity
of the organisation should be in line with the views and thoughts about what the
organisation wants to be and what and how it communicates to stakeholders. For the
corporate brand to be coherent, every action the organisation makes should signal
and communicate in line with what the organisation is and wants to be. It would be
ideal if personnel, managers and stakeholders would be all of one mind about the
components of brand equity. For the corporate brand to be coherent, it should also be
important to acknowledge in the organisation what are the views of stakeholders
about brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality and brand associations (see
e.g. Aaker 1996). What makes the management of brand equity troublesome is the
multiple views of stakeholders. Also, multiple sources of brand equity assets exist.
This study is trying to see corporate brand equity in large scale, and thus both the
external and internal components of brand equity are found from the theoretical
framework. It seems that the literature on corporate brand highlights the existence of
external and internal environment – the image and identity of corporate brand – and
thus it seems obvious that also corporate brand equity builds in the external and
42
internal environment of the organisation. External component of the model is the
group of stakeholders as well as in a way the brand equity assets: the views, thoughts
and behaviour of stakeholders, also called as brand equity assets in the marketing
literature. Nevertheless, in this study the brand equity assets are not understood as an
actual component of corporate brand equity, but only as part of the stakeholders, as a
way for them to see and evaluate the corporate brand. Internal components, on the
other hand, are the components inside the organisation, such as personnel and
manager or owner of the organisation.
3.3.1 External components of corporate brand equity in SMEs
In this study the external component of corporate brand is the group of stakeholders.
Corporate brand has not only customers and their views affecting corporate brand
equity, but multiple groups of stakeholders and thus they are seen as the external
component of corporate brand equity. Stakeholders have an overlapping position
concerning the organisation because for example the personnel of the organisation
can also be seen as stakeholders, depending on their role in the organisation. For
clarification, in this study stakeholders are seen as the external stakeholders, in which
personnel are not seen as part of the group. Thus, stakeholders are not concrete
internal parts of the organisation, but their influence can be seen as an interaction
with the internal parts such as personnel. Stakeholders also have a tight relationship
with the organisation. Stakeholders have also a two-way relationship with the
organisation, meaning that for example their feedback may be in a critical role in
corporate brand equity building. Stakeholders relate to the organisation also through
core values, with which they should be able to identify themselves.
Part of the model in this study consists of the brand equity assets, which are not seen
as components of corporate brand equity, but as part of the component of
stakeholders. The model of brand equity and its assets by Aaker (1996, 9) is
frequently being referred to in the literature of marketing. Furthermore, Kotler,
Armstrong, Saunders and Wong (1996, 916) agree with Aaker (1996, 9) and define
brand equity alike. Thus the model of brand equity assets seems to be appropriate
and highlights the essence of brand equity from the customer perspective. The model
divides brand equity into five asset categories: brand loyalty, brand awareness,
43
perceived quality, brand associations and other proprietary brand assets (including
patents, trademarks, channel relationships etc.) (Aaker 1996, 9). Keller has also
studied customer-based brand equity and similar categories of brand equity can also
be found from his conclusions (Keller 2003, 67). The value of the brand, brand
equity, is based on the extent to which these categories are strong (Kotler et al. 1996,
916). The basis of this model is in product branding.
The asset categories of brand equity by Aaker (1996) are suitable also for corporate
brand building. However, since corporate brand building is about managing multiple
stakeholder groups and not only customer-based, the title customer-based brand
equity is not adequate. The assets in corporate brand building are corresponding but
the content of the categories may not be the same. Thus, Aaker’s model has been
supplemented with some additional features of corporate branding, and this
concludes to a new model, stakeholder-based brand equity (see figure 4). It should
also be noted that according to the environment, situation and organisation in hand,
different aspects and assets of the model may have different and more important
roles.
What should also be noted is that in existing literature these elements are referred to
as brand equity assets and they are seen as creating brand equity (see e.g. Aaker
1996, 8-9). On the other hand, in this study these assets are not seen as actual
components of corporate brand equity, the pieces from which corporate brand equity
consist of, but on the contrary only as a way of seeing and evaluating brand equity, in
a way part of the stakeholder groups. Thus, these assets are stakeholders’ way of
seeing corporate brand equity, and not concrete components of corporate brand
equity.
44
BRAND EQUITY
Other ProprietaryBrand Assets
-Other elements of the brand creatingcompetitive edge
Brand associations
-Elements connecting the stakeholder tothe brand
-Communication aboutthe brand
-Experiences aboutthe brand
-Image of the brand
-Strong, favorable and unique associations
Perceived Quality
- Perceptions aboutthe brand
- Superiority overcompetitors
- Trust on the brand
Brand loyalty
-Commitment tothe brand
-Reputation on the minds of stakeholders
-Willingness torepurchasing
-Attachment to the brand
-Positive experience
Brand awareness
-Brand recognition
- Brand recall
-Ability to attach thebrand into context
-Familiarity
BRAND EQUITY
Other ProprietaryBrand Assets
-Other elements of the brand creatingcompetitive edge
Brand associations
-Elements connecting the stakeholder tothe brand
-Communication aboutthe brand
-Experiences aboutthe brand
-Image of the brand
-Strong, favorable and unique associations
Perceived Quality
- Perceptions aboutthe brand
- Superiority overcompetitors
- Trust on the brand
Brand loyalty
-Commitment tothe brand
-Reputation on the minds of stakeholders
-Willingness torepurchasing
-Attachment to the brand
-Positive experience
Brand awareness
-Brand recognition
- Brand recall
-Ability to attach thebrand into context
-Familiarity
Figure 4. Stakeholder-based brand equity (adapted from Aaker 1992b and Aaker 1996)
In this study stakeholders are referred to as the external component of corporate
brand equity. Part of the external environment is also corporate brand equity assets,
which are a way for the stakeholders to see, feel and evaluate the corporate brand.
Thus they are seen as being part of the stakeholder group, and not a concrete
component of corporate brand equity. The assets are also part of the image of the
corporate brand because they are the view of outsiders about the brand. In the same
way corporate reputation is also part of this category and is another way to see the
corporate brand equity assets. The assets of this model are referred to as external
because the sources of these assets are stakeholders outside the organisation. Some
elements and examples of the stakeholder-based brand equity are introduced next,
from the viewpoint of corporate brand.
Brand loyalty
Brand loyalty is an element of brand equity referring to the loyalty of stakeholders
for the organisation and its brand. Stakeholders are loyal to corporate brand, when
they have an ongoing relationship with the brand. When corporate brand promise is
kept and when stakeholders get what they expected from the organisation over and
over again, corporate reputation strengthens (Argenti & Druckenmiller 2004).
45
Brand awareness
According to Aaker (1996, 10), brand awareness is about the strength of a brand’s
presence in the consumer’s mind. In this context it should be thought as the strength
of the brand presence in the stakeholders’ minds. Brand equity may be built on for
example brand recognition (Krake 2005). According to Krake (2005), for example
the entrepreneur or the leader of the organisation can have a significant role in brand
recognition in SMEs. He or she is a source of inspiration and organisation in the
organisation, but also the actual personification of the brand. It should be important
to make sure that this is being exploited in the organisation as a source of brand
awareness and in that way as a source of brand equity.
Balmer and Gray (2003) have instead highlighted that in corporate branding, the
brand name and/or logo are important elements creating brand awareness and
recognition, as well as signs of trust and assurance of the organisation. According to
Rode and Vallaster (2005) the name, the logo and the slogan of the organisation are
part of corporate design. Krake (2005) has noted that creating only one brand is a
good way to prevent awareness being fragmented away.
Perceived quality
Perceived quality can be build up by showing that the quality is superior to a
competitor’s (Aaker 1996, 123). As Aaker notes, this may also mean that the aim is
towards being the best at what the organisation does. Trust is also part of the
perceived quality, thus building trust may enhance the perception about quality.
Brand associations
Brand associations are everything which connects the stakeholders to the brand.
These include user associations, properties of the brand, operating situations,
associations about the organisation or characters or symbols of brand personality, as
well as common product attributes together with benefits and attitudes, people,
relationships and corporate credibility (see e.g. Aaker & Joachimsthaler 2000, 39;
Keller 2000, 133). Especially important in the corporate brand context are the
associations about the organisation. According to Beverland, Napoli and Yakimova
(2007), at corporate branding level the brand identity is more abstract compared to
product branding, and thus also the associations become more abstract. This means
46
that the associations are based more on intangible components of the business.
(Beverland et al. 2007.)
Corporate brand, seeing the brand as an organisation, generates organisational
associations (Aaker 1996, 116). According to Aaker these organisational associations
can be attached to the brand as part of the brand identity. Thus, the two sides of
branding should be corresponding; the actual brand identity should be similar to the
view of stakeholders about the brand, the brand image. According to Aaker (1996,
117) for the brand to succeed, the brand should be developed so that the associations
reflect and are part of the brand identity. Krake (2005) has recommended that as a
source of brand equity, SMEs could concentrate on a few brand associations, perhaps
on one or two most important ones. The organisation can focus on a creatively-
developed marketing program based on these associations (Krake 2005).
Other proprietary brand assets
Other proprietary brand assets are additional elements of the brand which create
competitive edge to the organisation. These assets include for example patents,
channel relationships and trademarks (Aaker 1996, 8). In this study these assets are
left aside and are not considered further, for it is noticed by Lehmann and Winer
(2002, 254) that they are tied to a physical product or process and not to the exact
brand.
3.3.2 Internal components of corporate brand equity in SMEs
Corporate brand equity does not consist only of the external component of the brand
and inside the minds of stakeholders of the organisation. Instead, key components
can be found especially from the internal environment. These key components are
referred to as internal components of the corporate brand because they are more or
less inside the organisation and can be affected by the organisation. For this reason
the internal components can also be seen as the identity of the corporate brand. Key
components are the name and actions of the organisation, personnel, manager or
owner, core values and the organisational culture. In some cases also the stakeholders
can be seen as internal components of the organisation, because their role may be
such deeply connected to the organisation and corporate brand inside the
47
organisation for example by tight co-operation. This may also be the case if
personnel are part of stakeholders. Nevertheless, in this study the stakeholders are
seen as external component for clarification. All in all, compared to customer-based
brand equity, corporate brand equity is even wider and there are multiple internal
components which are critical to corporate brand equity. These internal components
are introduced next.
The name and the actions of the organisation
Name and in some cases the symbol of the corporate brand are the base for corporate
brand equity. Corporate brand equity builds on these. But not only the name, but also
every action the organisation makes affects the constitution of corporate brand
equity. Activities of the organisation are the ones which accumulate brand loyalty,
brand awareness, perceived quality and brand associations, that is the views,
opinions and thoughts about the organisation and its brand. Activities and the name
of the organisation can be seen by stakeholders, and they are the base for the
perceptions and associations about the organisation and corporate brand. They are
usually the first elements of the organisation visible to external audience.
Personnel
The personnel of the organisation have central role in the existence of brand equity,
since they are the ones who communicate the brand to outsiders. They also enact
core values to stakeholders. Not only has the conscious communication an effect on
brand equity but also the unconscious communication and behaviour of personnel in
its entirety. Personnel have a great effect on the perceptions of stakeholders about the
corporate brand. Thus, the perceptions the personnel have about the brand should be
coherent and consistent for being able to increase corporate brand equity.
Manager
The manager or owner of the organisation has the responsibility of the brand and its
management. The manager can also be seen as the face of the corporate brand.
Manager is usually the one in tight contact with stakeholders and is part of visible
aspects of the corporate brand to outsiders. Thus, his or her role is central.
48
Corporate core values
According to Knox, Maklan and Thompson (2000, 139), concentrating on marketing
elements such as image or quality, is not enough. Instead what can be done is that the
whole business, including brand and marketing management, can be based on core
values, or on unique organisational values, which is the term used by Knox et al.
(2000, 139). This gives support to the previously mentioned notion that core values
are also the base or core of the corporate brand building, and these values are
determined by management, possibly together with the personnel. Thus, corporate
core values are the starting point of corporate branding and brand equity building.
They are the base on which the brand is build on. Corporate core values capture the
essence of the organisation.
Organisational culture
Organisational culture builds up from the elements such as the behaviour and
communication inside the organisation. It is describing the way the people in
organisation act and how they are supposed to perform. It is also about practicing the
values of the organisation. Organisational culture should support the meaning of the
corporate brand to be able to increase corporate brand equity.
Corporate branding is about attributes of the organisation (Aaker 1996, 82).
According to Aaker these attributes are created by the people, culture, values and
programs of the organisation. In this study the assumption is that in a SME
environment, corporate brand equity building demands for attention concerning
personnel, organisational culture and core values of the organisation, as well as the
management’s role and the impact of stakeholders. Attention should also be paid to
the base of brand equity, the brand name or symbol. The theoretical framework
(figure 5) describes the corporate brand equity in SMEs as a whole.
49
CO
RPO
RA
TE B
RA
ND
EQ
UIT
Y
Corporate core values
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Stakeholders
Organisational culture
Name of the organisationEvery action the organisation takes
ManagerPersonnel
- Brand loyalty- Brand awareness- Perceived quality- Brand associations
CORPORATE IDENTITY
CORPORATE IMAGE
CO
RPO
RA
TE B
RA
ND
EQ
UIT
Y
Corporate core values
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Stakeholders
Organisational culture
Name of the organisationEvery action the organisation takes
ManagerPersonnel
- Brand loyalty- Brand awareness- Perceived quality- Brand associations
CORPORATE IDENTITY
CORPORATE IMAGE
Figure 5. Corporate brand equity in SMEs from the wider perspective
Brand equity building in SMEs should be about logical policy and consistent
communications (Krake 2005) in order to benefit from it wholly. Indeed, the brand
building and maintaining should be a coherent unity for the corporate brand to be
successful. This means that the identity and the image of corporate brand should be
corresponding, thus both the internal and external environment and the factors should
be in line with each other and all having the same message about the organisation.
According to this model, corporate brand equity is the sum of the external and
internal components; the sum of the name of the organisation, every action the
organisation takes, personnel, manager, corporate core values, organisational culture
and finally the stakeholders and their views about the organisation. Together all these
make up the corporate brand equity.
50
4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this chapter the methodology of the study is presented to the reader. Also, methods
of the study and the progress of the study are expressed.
4.1 Research method
Scientific research is always guided by certain guidelines. Researchers have to obey
paradigms, laws of doing research (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 1988, 12). Choices and
justifications of the study are related to method and methodology of the study, as
well as to ontological and epistemological principles. Ontology discusses about the
nature of reality by answering to questions such as “what is the nature of the world?”
and epistemology on the other hand is interested in the origins, nature and
construction of knowing and knowledge (Maykut & Morehouse 1994, 3-4). In doing
research, it is important to be aware of and understand the philosophic assumptions
(Maykut & Morehouse 1994, 1-3) and their relation to the research and researcher
(Eskola & Suoranta 1998, 28).
In this study the reality is understood to be subjective. This means that the researcher
is not only an impartial observer, but involved in the research process (Maykut &
Morehouse 1994, 19). The researcher cannot have an outside, neutral role.
Perceptions and experiences change over time and context and are different for each
person (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 13). These affect the way people see the world
and certain phenomenon, thus reality is constructed by individuals. In order to
understand the social reality constructed by humans, the researcher cannot remain
distant in the social phenomenon in hand (Shaw 1999). In a study of small firms, it is
seen important that the researcher adopts an approach that allows him or her to get
close to the participants, to penetrate their internal logic and to interpret the
subjective understanding of reality (ibid.).
This study is about studying an understudied area for further theory development.
Existing theory from different sources is gathered together and revised to suit the
phenomena on hand. Theoretical framework is compared with empirical data and the
framework is adapted to better understand the phenomenon under research.
51
According to Perry (1998), there are two major approaches to theory development
among scientific paradigms: deductive theory testing and inductive theory building.
The deductive method proceeds from theory to empirical research, testing existing
theory with empirical results through hypotheses (Perry 1998; Eriksson &
Kovalainen 2008, 22). The inductive method on the other hand builds theory purely
based on empirical data, proceeding from empirical research to theoretical results
(Perry 1998; Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 22-23). Qualitative research is said to
often proceed inductively (Koskinen, Alasuutari & Peltonen 2005, 31). However,
Perry (1998) argues that pure deduction might prevent the development of new
theory and induction on the other hand might prevent benefiting from existing theory.
Indeed, these two approaches seldom exist as such (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008,
23), but are used together and exist both in parallel.
Abduction is a way to combine induction and deduction in one research (Eriksson &
Kovalainen 2008, 23). This study uses the logic of abduction, in other words the
theory and the empirical part of the study affect each other and develop
simultaneously during the research. The theory is over time developed according to
what is discovered through empirical fieldwork, as well as through analysis and
interpretation (Dubois & Gadde 2002). Through empirical observations yet not
identified and unanticipated but related, issues may be found and further explored
(ibid.). With abduction the researcher is able to expand his or her understanding of
both theory and empirical phenomena (ibid.). The logic of abduction is particularly
suitable for the study on hand, since the logic is well suitable for theory
development.
This study is also action-oriented research. The aim in action-oriented research is to
increase understanding and empirical part usually consists of few research objects,
through which versatile knowledge can be gained (Neilimo & Näsi 1980, 35).
According to Mäkinen (1980, 51) in action-oriented research the phenomenon should
be examined in its own context. In action-oriented research interpretation has a
central role (Mäkinen 1980, 71) and the orientation is towards understanding the
phenomenon. According to action-oriented research the researcher has a subjective
role and is the one getting information from actual actors in everyday life (Pihlanto
52
1994). The aim in action-oriented research is to both develop a theory and give
practical implications for the case company (Gummesson 2000, 119).
The research method should be in line with the theoretical framework (Alasuutari
1999, 82). Thus, it is important to choose the right methods for the research with
keeping in mind the research problem. The characteristics of qualitative research are
to gain comprehensive knowledge about the phenomena in natural and distinct
situations, to use human being as an instrument of gaining knowledge and to handle
the cases as unique (Hirsjärvi, Remes & Sajavaara 2006, 155). In qualitative research
the intention is to increase understanding about the operations of the organisations
(Koskinen et al. 2005, 16), to find or reveal facts and reality, rather than to verify
certain statements and to understand the research subject (Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 152).
The starting point in qualitative research is to describe real life (ibid.). Since the aim
in this study is to explore an understudied phenomenon, qualitative research is the
right tool for it. Furthermore, qualitative research method has been justified to give a
desired level of insight into the world of SMEs (Krake 2005) as it allows small
organisations to be viewed in their entirety, permitting the researcher to get close to
participants and to penetrate their realities and interpret their perceptions (Shaw
1999).
For the method to be in line with research problem and research questions, case study
method was selected in this study. In case study research, research problems are
usually more descriptive than prescriptive, and the research problem is a “how do”
problem, rather than “how should” problem (Perry 1998). With case study detailed
information about the phenomenon can be reached (Koskinen et al. 2005, 167). Case
study also is a method which allows investigating a contemporary phenomenon
within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between the phenomenon
and context are not clearly defined (Yin 2003, 13). According to Eisenhardt (1989)
case study method is particularly adequate to new research areas, or research areas
for which existing theory seems not suitable. The study and the research problem on
hand have such many unexplained and unstudied areas and characteristics, and thus
case study research seems to fit the study well. Also, theory development from case
study research has important strengths such as novelty, testability and empirical
53
validity (Eisenhardt 1989). These arise from the intimate linkage with empirical
evidence (ibid.).
A single case study can employ an embedded design, to give the chance to have
multiple levels of analysis within a single case and in this way extending the analysis
and enhancing the insights (Yin 2003, 46). A single case study was chosen for this
study since the phenomenon wanted to be seen from two aspects: to explore the
thoughts and opinions inside and outside the organisation. With seeing the
phenomenon from these two views, it was seen to produce more trustworthy
knowledge about the phenomenon. A single case study can be justified for example if
the case company is being unique, the case uncovers important information or is
being revealed in a way that it gives information about a phenomenon which has not
previously been researched (Koskinen et al. 2005, 161). The latter is also the reason
for choosing case study as a method in this study.
4.2 Empirical research design
Part of case study research is many ways to collect data, such as interviews,
conversations and observations (Yin 2003, 85). Interview is a unique data collection
method since the interviewee and the interviewer are in direct interaction with each
other. Interview is a data collection method, in which a scarcely known phenomenon
can be studied with being able to deepen and clarify the answers given about the
phenomenon. For qualitative research using methods such as thematic interviews are
supported and thus they were chosen for this study also. According to Perry (1998)
theme interviews are suitable for a research using the logic of abduction, in which the
theory and empirical part are in interplay. In theme interview the subject matters are
known, but there is no strict form or order of the questions. Theme interview was
chosen for this study also because of it being a method for describing the nature and
characteristics of the phenomenon. (Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 155, 193-194, 197;
Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2000, 67.)
The theme interview, or the semi structured interview, is a method in which some of
the viewpoints of the interview are beforehand defined, but not all (Hirsjärvi &
Hurme 2000, 47-48). Thus, the interview proceeds according to certain central
54
themes, not according to detailed questions (ibid.). As the interview is not too guided
by the interviewer, also some new and essential facts can occur (Koskinen et al.
2005, 104). At the same time the outline of the interview helps the interviewer to
maintain the focus in the interview and to keep in mind what is important (Yin 2003,
86). In this study the outlines of the interviews were made in advance according to
the themes of the theoretical framework. There were beforehand prepared questions,
but the order and shape of the questions changed in the interviews according to what
best suited the situation. The themes used in the interviews (see appendices 1, 2 and
3) were the same to all interviewees, as is suggested by Hirsjärvi and Hurme (2000,
48). The interviews were pursuing for free discussion and in this way the knowledge
about the phenomenon was also deepened with own opinions and thoughts of the
interviewees.
The actual empirical research consisted of three interviews, which were conducted in
the spring 2009. As the qualitative research supports for human beings used as an
instrument for the data collection (Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 155), the researcher made the
interviews. The interviewees were chosen with discretionary logic to represent the
different viewpoints of the organisation and its stakeholders, and thus the managing
director, the employee and the customer were chosen to be interview. In the selection
of appropriate customer for the interview, the researcher got information concerning
the customers from the organisation and the selection was affected by this. The
customer was chosen for the study on the grounds that it was one of the biggest
customers and had been working with the organisation for several years already.
Also, the willingness of the customer to participate in the study was one reason for
this particular customer to be chosen. The lack of availability of time and other
resources of the researcher were one of the reasons why only one customer was
chosen to be interviewed. Also, it was seen important that the study would depict not
only the thoughts of the customer, but above all the viewpoint of the organisation,
and thus the resources wanted to be divided equally for both sources of information.
Before the first interview with the managing director of the organisation, a meeting
was arranged between the researcher and Jaakko Seppälä, the chairman of the board
in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd. This was a meeting in which some basic information about
the organisation was revealed. The meeting lasted approximately an hour and the
55
researcher made notes about what was discussed. Secondary data was also used in
this study. According to Yin (2003, 87) the most important reason for using
documents in case studies is to confirm and augment evidence from other sources.
Documents can be used for example to verify the correct spellings or to find out
specific details to corroborate information from other sources (ibid.). In this study the
brochures and Internet pages of the organisation were the most frequently used
secondary data sources and they were used at the same time as the empirical research
was executed, as well as before the actual interviews to bring more information about
the organisation for the attention of the researcher.
The first interview was with the managing director of the organisation, Risto
Hiljanen. The second interview was with the employee of the organisation, Markku
Määttä and the final interview was with a customer of the organisation, Tarja
Väyrynen from Turveruukki Ltd. The interviews were made in Finnish, as it was the
mother tongue of all the interviewees. The interviews are presented in the following
table 3. All the interviews were recorded for later transcription with the permission of
interviewees and also additional notes were made during the interviews. The
interviewer had a beforehand made outlines of the interviews with her in the
interviews and in this way it was secured that everything was asked from the
interviewees and there was nothing left to ask about. Also, additional batteries and
pencils were in hand and it was made sure that the recorder was functioning during
the interviews.
Table 3. The interviews of the study
The researcher1 hour 15 minutes3.3.2009Tarja Väyrynen, Environmental manager, Turveruukki Ltd
The researcher40 minutes2.3.2009Markku Määttä, Project engineer, EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The researcher1 h 40 minutes18.2.2009Risto Hiljanen, Managing director, EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The interviewerDuration of the interview
Time of the interview
The interviewee
The researcher1 hour 15 minutes3.3.2009Tarja Väyrynen, Environmental manager, Turveruukki Ltd
The researcher40 minutes2.3.2009Markku Määttä, Project engineer, EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The researcher1 h 40 minutes18.2.2009Risto Hiljanen, Managing director, EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The interviewerDuration of the interview
Time of the interview
The interviewee
56
According to Shaw (1999), the collection of social data is best conducted in an
environment in which the phenomenon naturally occurs. The methods should also be
open and attentive for the internal logic of participants (ibid.). This is why two of the
three interviews were done in the workplace of the interviewees. One interview was
conducted in a neutral environment to have an undisturbed and quiet location and the
chance to speak freely.
The interviews were transcribed from word to word after each interview was done.
The analysing of the data started as soon as the researcher started collecting the data
and it was ongoing until the final sentence of the research was written. Notices made
were written to the study or to additional notes used during the analysis. The analysis
was done by using QSR N’Vivo, a suitable software program for the analysis. There
were a total of 12 themes used in the analysis. These themes are presented in
Appendix 4 and the categorising of the analysis in Appendix 5. One theme emerged
from the interviews even though it was not found in the theoretical framework. With
the help of the theoretical framework and the empirical analysis the intention was to
interpret the data extensively and to outline the theoretical phenomenon again
(Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2000, 143) and in this way to solve the research problem.
57
5 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
In this chapter the empirical part of the research is being presented. First, the case
company is introduced to the reader. Following that the description of the data and
analysis of it are done, as according to Hirsjärvi and Hurme (2000, 145) the
describing of the data is the basis for the analysis. Finally results of the empirical
research are revealed.
5.1 Case company
The case company is a small-sized enterprise EHP-Tekniikka Ltd. Company has
started its operation in Oulu, in which headquarters are located. The company also
has an office in Helsinki. The company was founded around 2000 and it is part of
Ecofoster Group. The company operates in Finland, but in the near future the aim is
also towards international markets. The company operates solely in business to
business markets.
The company employs four people, including the managing director of the
organisation. Research and development is strongly done in Helsinki and other
operations such as sales and marketing, assembly and maintenance are done in Oulu.
The product package of the organisation has been sold since 2006 and from that on
the growth of the turnover has been about 40 to 50 percent per year. In 2009 the
turnover of the organisation is expected to be around 300 000 to 400 000 euros.
The company concentrates on environmental technologies and its core competence
deals with water quality and quantity measuring service and environmental
measuring system. The company offers own developed monitoring stations,
monitoring facilities and services, which are tailored specifically to customer needs,
in particularly to field circumstances which are not stable and constant. Equipment
and services fit for example to mining, peat industry, waste management sector,
agriculture and forestry. EHP-Tekniikka has customers such as Turveruukki Ltd,
Oulun Vesi Ltd, Finnish Maritime Administration and M-Real Ltd.
58
EHP-Tekniikka Ltd was chosen as the case company of the study since it is a small-
sized company and thus fits the theoretical framework which was build to depict
components of corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises. Also,
EHP-Tekniikka Ltd was seen to suit the study as it has been operating already a few
years and has a corporate brand. The amount of personnel was part of the criteria,
and EHP-Tekniikka Ltd was seen appropriate as it has more than one or two people
working in the company. It was also seen important that the company operates in
business to business markets, as EHP-Tekniikka Ltd does. The company was also
seen suitable for the study since it had customers which were willing to participate in
the study.
5.2 Empirical analysis
The empirical data of the study consists of three interviews done by the researcher.
These interviews are used in the analysis of the study. With the analysis, the aim is to
increase understanding about the phenomenon on hand, to deepen the understanding
of components of corporate brand equity in SMEs and their embodiment in the case
company. The analysis follows the theoretical framework of the study but also adds a
new theme, product and/or service, which emerged from the empirical data. Thus,
there are a total of 12 themes used in the analysis.
The analysis is done with following the themes of the study, and in each theme the
whole data is used all together. Thus, the analysis is done by not separating the
interviews as it is seen most important to see the big picture. For clarification the
direct quotations used in the analysis are also written in Finnish in the footnote, for
that was the original language of the interviews.
5.2.1 Stakeholders
Stakeholders of the organisation in this study include such as financiers, existing and
potential customers, tax and permission authorities, resellers, suppliers and
accountants. Some relationships the organisation has are more lasting and continual,
some are only separate transactions. In analysing the importance of stakeholders such
necessary groups as financiers, authorities and accountants are paid smaller attention
59
in this study. Customers seem to be the most important stakeholder group within this
organisation. There has also been co-operation with local entrepreneurs in the field of
marketing, and co-operation exists also with some suppliers, but it seems not as
important and extensive as the co-operation with customers. The co-operation in
marketing has dealt with marketing materials made for seminars and brochures, as
well as business gifts and Internet marketing. The co-operation with suppliers
consists of finding solutions for the customers of EHP-Tekniikka Ltd by using
certain components of suppliers. There exist a few of this kind of suppliers, but
usually the buying of components is solely a single transaction for EHP-Tekniikka
Ltd.
For the organisation finding the new customers includes ways such as marketing in
Internet and personal selling. Personal selling is done by having in the organisation
people which have experiences from different sectors and also by actively following
the media in case of suitable projects. The customers usually find the organisation by
having heard from it from a friend or a friends’ friend, and thus it seems that word-
of-mouth communication is important for the organisation.
When dealing with existing customers phone and e-mail are the most common ways
to be in contact, along with personal meetings usually happening in the field. Some
relationships with the customers can be more or less friendly because they have been
built in a way that there are certain persons to be contacted with. This is done
because of the specific and complicated technology involved. It is seen as beneficial
to both the organisation and customers when certain facts do not need to be taught
over and over again. According to the managing director of EHP-Tekniikka Ltd, the
relationships are lasting and honest. The co-operation with certain customers indeed
seems tight, including continuous co-working together, such as designing and finding
solutions to customers’ needs. The customer also sees the relationship as committing,
because of the complex technology and continual maintenance services.
60
“…development work has been done together in a way that we have told our experiences and they have then developed their product or product selection according to customer needs.”2 (Customer)
With existing and new customers part of the co-operation is the mutual designing and
solution finding for the needs of the customer. Thus, the organisation offers the
customers an overall problem solving and not only device for measuring. This is a
tight co-operation which includes many rounds, teaches both the customer and the
organisation and is done together by them. Being in contact with the customer also
includes maintenance meetings and it is indeed continual. According to the managing
director, there is a kind of marriage between the organisation and the customer
because the co-operation and being in contact is continual. With existing customers
the organisation is in contact with at least once a month by phone or e-mail, if not in
person. The organisation is not only contacting the customers, but also the customers
are in contact with the organisation.
It is said by the managing director that the organisation wants to convey the image of
the organisation to existing and potential customers, as well as to other actors which
advance the sales of the organisation. However, it seems that the organisation does
not put an effort to communicate about the organisation to existing customers,
excluding the selling, but wants to reach only potential customers. This is also
noticed by the customer, who seems to want more communication and information
about the organisation and even flyers and advertisements of the organisation would
be gladly seen. The maintenance of the relationships with existing customers seems
to be about renewing the contracts yearly, and nothing else. Feedback is asked from
customers, but it is, if not totally, at least for the most part concerning only products
and anything related to them. According to the managing director the feedback has
been mostly positive and in his words it can be seen for example in a way that the
organisation has not lost any of its customers needing the solutions. Feedback is said
to affect strongly in the organisation as it is said to guide the actions. If customers
have something to ask about, the question is answered as soon as possible. This is
also acknowledged by the customer, who sees the organisation as customer oriented.
2 ”…kehitystyötä tehty siinä mielessä yhteistyössä, että kerrottu niitä omia kokemuksia, he on sitten kehittäny sitä omaa, tuota tuotettaan tai tuotevalikoimaa sitte vähän niinkö asiakaslähtöisistä tarpeista.”
61
The personnel see most customers as one of the most important factor concerning the
visibility of the organisation because existing customers spread information about the
organisation. Also according to the managing director the reputation is based on the
thoughts of the customers about the organisation. When customers are satisfied, they
built the reputation of the organisation within the potential customers and market the
organisation by telling about it to potential customers. Because of this it is seen
extremely important by the personnel that no customer gets an impression about the
organisation as being not able to do what is promised. The impression the customer
has about the organisation seems to be twofold; on the other hand the organisation is
seen by them clearly as an innovative developer and then it is also wondering,
because of the products being new, if certain directions are thinking the products are
not yet trustworthy. This seems to be, however, just a thought what others may think
about the organisation.
“…existing customers, when they are happy. They then spread the word and in this way many of our new customers have been in contact with us, because customers talk to each other and spread the information about us, market our organisation.”3 (Employee)
The customers are also seen as to act as a reference and in this way affect for
example the gaining of new customers. In this way existing customers affect
potential and new customers. Some customers for example insist seeing the reference
first, before willing to negotiate about co-operation in any way. According to
Turveruukki Ltd, EHP-Tekniikka Ltd has gained already some significant actors to
its reference list. The customers acting as a reference have an important effect on the
organisation by telling about the organisation and its operations to others. In this way
they can act as advancing the sales, or on the other hand as a barrier. The importance
of customers as references is also acknowledged by the customer, who is often asked
about the organisation and its products. When co-operation with certain organisation
goes well, this tells also to other organisations that EHP-Tekniikka Ltd is a potential
organisation to do business with. According to the managing director, this is seen
3 ”…jo olemassa olevien asiakkaitten, kun ne on tyytyväisiä. Niin ne levittää sanaa, niinku meijän uusia asiakkaita on nyt paljo tullukki että ne on, asiakkaat juttelee keskenään ja levittää meijän tietoa meijän puolesta, ne markkinoi meijän yritystä.”
62
especially important for example when starting business in a new business field with
new customers.
“And in this way it has of course been made up then in the eyes of new customers, I mean we have been able to sell then with the imagined, good image of ours to similar kinds of operators, to new customers our products, services, systems. Good example is the mining industry. In 2005 we started co-operation with Pyhäsalmi Mine and have in our own opinion been able to make it work quite well and the customer has also been quite satisfied, well satisfied, and in this way we have built ourselves a reference and also credibility then in the eyes of new customers in the mining industry, like these mines which are running now in Finland.”4 (Managing Director)
In the organisation it is believed that customers see them as a fast actor who takes
care of what it promises to do and maybe even a bit more. It is believed that the
organisation has quite good reputation. The managing director believes that the
impressions about the organisation have not changed when time has passed, only in a
way that now there are more those aware of the organisation. This is also
acknowledged by the customer. What is essential according to the managing director
is that the reputation has to be flawless and customers cannot be left thinking
whether the organisation is able to do what is promised. According to the managing
director, the organisation exists to serve the needs of customers. It is interesting to
note that the role of customers’ as such important factor concerning the image of the
organisation is such highly acknowledged and still the maintenance of relationships
seems not to take into account this.
In the relationship between EHP-Tekniikka Ltd and Turveruukki Ltd, the co-
operation seems to build to a win-win situation, where both parties benefit from the
relationship. For example the customer says for them there is a twofold benefiting;
the practical one where EHP-Tekniikka Ltd may ease their operations, and on the
other hand the image of Turveruukki Ltd may become better due to the device of
EHP-Tekniikka Ltd. This may also be the reason for the relationship to be such tight, 4 ”Ja sitä kautta on tietystikin myöskin rakentunu sitten uusien asiakkaitten silmissä eli on pystytty sitten myymään sillä meijän kuvitellulla, hyvällä mielikuvalla niin vastaavan tyyppisille toimijoille, uusille asiakkaille siis meijän näitä tuotteita, palveluita, järjestelmiä. Hyvä esimerkki kaivosteollisuus: 2005 alotettiin Pyhäsalmi Minen kanssa yhteistyö ja on saatu se vasta toimimaan omasta mielestämme ihan hyvin ja se asiakaskin on kohtuu tyytyväinen ollu, varsinkin tyytyväinen, ja sitä kautta on sitten saatu rakennettua niinku itellemme referenssiä ja myöskin uskottavuutta sitten uusien kaivosteollisuusasiakkaitten kanssa, kuten näitä uusia kaivoksia mitä nyt pyörii Suomessa.”
63
lasting and flexible. The organisations are in contact at least once in two weeks.
According to the customer, the managing director of the organisation was one of the
reasons to start the business, and thus it seems that personal connections to
stakeholders benefit EHP-Tekniikka Ltd. The relationship between the organisations
is the kind where solutions are mutually thought about and together problems are
fixed. Things can be discussed without having to prettify the message. This is seen as
an important part of the co-operation, being able to speak straight. This may also well
be the reason why Turveruukki Ltd sees the products and the organisation
recommendable to others as well. According to the customer, the relationship is
unique in a way that the organisation does not have this kind of tight, developing and
experimental relationships with others.
According to the customer, everyone in their organisation knows the people in EHP-
Tekniikka Ltd and vice versa. The relationship being such tight and unique seems to
be a reason for unique co-operation between the organisations as well. Turveruukki
Ltd is currently planning a new venture with which EHP-Tekniikka Ltd is part of.
This is a collaborative project about a totally new environment, and it is the aim of
the project to increase the visibility of the organisations as well as to better the
images of the organisations. The customer sees them as being part of brand building
in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd as they are involved in their operations through supporting
and spreading the information about the organisation. The aim of the co-operation in
general seems to be for Turveruukki Ltd to ease their operations also.
“But in my interest is that indeed these devices of Risto would come into use more generally also and that it would also ease the operations in our field of business…”5 (Customer)
It seems that the more tightly the relationship and the co-operation, the more the
parties of the relationship are willing to yield for each other and are able to develop
something new. And this is not the only benefit from stakeholders to the organisation.
Conversely, it seems that stakeholders form an important role concerning the
organisation and its corporate brand and can indeed be said to be a component of
5 ”Mutta minun intresseissä on, ois se, että tosiaan, että nämä Ristonkin laitteet, nää tulis yleisemmin käyttöön ja että niitä tällä alalla, et se niinku helpottas sitten tätä, mm, meidänkin alan niinkun toimintaa…”
64
corporate brand equity. They affect the reputation of the organisation in many ways
such as being a reference or shaping the operations of the organisation. What should
be noted is that stakeholders are nevertheless a different component than the other
components inside the organisation because of being outsiders of the organisation
and thus not in the direct influence of the organisation.
5.2.2 Corporate brand loyalty
Signals of brand loyalty can be found easily in the case of EHP-Tekniikka Ltd and its
relationships to customers. In the organisation it has been paid attention to that the
reputation of the organisation seems to link to stakeholders and their opinions. In the
organisation the way to affect its image is done by keeping the promises made to
customers, as the theory already suggested previously. EHP-Tekniikka Ltd tries to
offer customers a quality service and is indeed customer oriented. The reputation is
tried to build on with the work of good quality and a fast reaction for customers
needs. Besides good quality and fast reaction speed, the organisation tries to
communicate to customers an image of a trustworthy organisation. The managing
director believes this is already true in the eyes of customers. It is believed in the
organisation that customers are satisfied to the organisation. Feedback has been the
kind which it is wanted to be.
“…it should be thought about us that we are a trustworthy deliverer who keeps the promises it makes. I do already believe this is what the customers think of us and this of course has to be the case also in the future.”6 (Managing Director)
The relationships between the customers and the organisation seem very continual
and it is said by the managing director that the organisation has only lost customers if
those customers have not needed the services offered by the organisation any more.
Otherwise the customer relationships are lasting and no customer has been lost. It
seems that certain relationships are such that when the relationship develops, more
and more co-operation is done between the organisations. This is the case also with
Turveruukki Ltd, and it is also noticed in the organisation that the co-operation is
6 ”…pitäis ajatella että ollaan niinkö luotettava toimittaja, joka pitää sanansa. Ja tekee sen minkä lupaa. Kyllä mää nyt kuvittelen että ne sitä nytkin ajattelee ja niin pitääkin tietysti ajatella jatkossa.”
65
indeed binding. With being able to offer customers solutions for the problems, the
organisation believes having a positive effect on the image of the organisation. The
co-operation consists of mutual learning, which is not only binding but also gives
additional value to both parties of the relationship. What seems also binding in the
case of Turveruukki Ltd and EHP-Tekniikka Ltd is the length of the co-operation.
When organisations have been co-operating such a long time, it seems important to
keep the relationship going on.
“…maybe exceptional also in a way that we don’t develop and try this kind of new with other device producers but with EHP-Tekniikka Ltd.”7 (Customer)
The managing director also highlights the role of products and their functioning and
quality as being part of the reputation. Thus it can be said that the actual quality also
has an effect on the perceived quality and is part of it. The customer has noticed
certain happenings which seem to be important concerning the reputation of the
organisation. Part of this is the experience with the previous employee in the well.
Thus, it can be said that positive experience is also found in this study as affecting
the whole picture of the organisation.
It seems that there is brand loyalty towards EHP-Tekniikka Ltd and its corporate
brand. The relationships to customers are continual and based on mutual co-
operation. In the organisation it is kept important to keep the promises made to
customers, and the organisation indeed have a reputation of being customer oriented
in their work. The attachment to the brand seems strong and this may well be partly
because of the complex technology and the need for maintenance and overall service
concerning the device. Through customers being satisfied, it also seems that the
reputation has the ability to better because of the important role of customers as
increasing it.
7 ”…ehkä niinku poikkeuksellisetkin siinä mielessä että, et me ei ehkä muiden laitetoimittajien kanssa sitten tämmöstä uutta niinkään paljon kehitetä ja kokeilla kuin mitä EHP:n kanssa.”
66
5.2.3 Corporate brand awareness
This study confirms the previous notions about brand awareness but some new
information was also found. The name of the organisation in written is first of all
mentioned as telling about the organisation and its operations, and it was several
times connected to the corporate brand. Thus, the name and the slogan, since the
name is mentioned as written, increase the awareness of the corporate brand. Parts of
awareness are also the employees and the managing director of the organisation. It
seems that depending on who is communicating with the organisation, the most
visible person may be different, and in this way not only the managing director is
visible to outsiders of the organisation. Customers are also part of increasing the
corporate brand awareness, not only acting as a reference, but also as increasing the
knowledge about the organisation and acting as a presenter of the products and
services of the organisation, which are also part of the visibility and awareness. With
the help of customers, more and more people are aware of the brand as customers tell
about the organisation to their customers and others outside the organisation.
The ways in which the organisation pursues to increase and maintain the awareness
in this case are most of all personal selling, marketing in Internet and certain events
and seminars, in which the organisation takes part. It is said by the managing director
that the aim of all communication is to increase the awareness of the organisation.
The organisation has also done co-operation concerning the marketing of the
organisation with local entrepreneurs. The most important way of increasing the
awareness seems to be the personal selling and marketing of the managing director. It
is said that in the last years the awareness of the organisation has increased and there
are more people now aware of the organisation and its operations. According to the
customers, the ways in which the information about the organisation can be gained
are internet pages of the organisation and personnel.
“In a way, we have discussed in person, we have been indeed in an open interplay with each other (with the employee).”8 (Customer)
8 ”Et tavallaan niinku henkilötasolla on keskusteltu, oltu hyvinkin tällain, sanotaanko tämmösessä avoimessa vuorovaikutuksessa (työntekijän kanssa).”
67
The present state of brand awareness is not easily seen in the study because there was
only one customer being interviewed and only her opinions concerning the
awareness are revealed. To find out the actual state of awareness, there should be
more customer interviews to see the whole picture. Nevertheless, some notions can
be made on the grounds of this research. It seems that the customer in hand has high
brand awareness concerning the corporate brand of EHP-Tekniikka Ltd and this is
obviously because of the tight and long lasting co-operation between the
organisations. Thus, because of the relationships also in more general being tight
with other customers as well, it could be said that the brand awareness seems high
also more generally among customers. As the organisation is not advertising and the
marketing concentrates mostly to personal selling, it can be said that the awareness is
due to this also. Furthermore, it seems that in this case the awareness is build among
customers of the organisation, and it is also said by the employee that in his belief the
corporate brand exists among certain customers, and nowhere else.
5.2.4 Perceived quality of the corporation
In the organisation, which seem to be the assumptions about perceptions of the
organisation in the minds of customers are a deep and versatile know-how and
experiences, being a trustful supplier of device and service, keeping its promises and
having a good quality, price, time of delivery as well as the technical know-how.
These are the characteristics which would gladly be seen by the managing director to
be linked to the organisation. It seems that part of the perceived quality is also the
actual quality of products and services. It is said both by the managing director and
the employee that the reputation and perceptions about the organisation have been
earned by hard work and the service and product being of a good quality.
“…with your own work and appearance the reputation is made such.”9 (Employee)
In the case of corporate branding, reputation seems to be part of perceived quality
also because it is related to the perceptions about the organisation. It is believed in
the organisation that the reputation is quite good. According to the managing
9 ”…tehdään sillä omalla työllä ja olemuksella se maine sellaiseksi että.”
68
director, part of this are the perceptions about the organisation as being trustworthy,
the work being of good quality and the work done quickly, the reaction speed being
fast. The perceptions about the corporate brand are being affected in the organisation
with these actions. It is believed that customers see the organisation as doing what it
promises. The distinguishing features of the organisation according to the managing
director and the employee include such as the easiness and usability of products,
reliability and the deep know-how.
According to the customer, on the other hand, the organisation is seen as dealing with
interesting area of business, as innovative and developing and as uncomplicated to
work with. The products of the organisation are seen as developed for extreme
conditions and even though they can never be said to be absolutely sure, they are
seen as very well and far developed and tested and can be recommended to others
also. There seems to be a bit of doubt concerning the organisation, but first and
foremost the organisation is seen as trustworthy and reliable, and the customer sees
the relationship between the organisations as unique in a way that the customer does
not build this kind of deep and tight relationships to many others.
“…these kind of cross-country mobiles, observation devices, it is an interesting topic. Even as a topic, since it is creating new, developing…”10 (Customer)
All in all, it seems that the study also supports previous notions about the perceived
quality. There can be found many perceptions about the organisation and they are
linked to different sides of the functioning, such as the quality of the service or the
unique characteristics of the organisation. There can be found distinguishing features
and the organisation is seen different from its few competitors and such superior that
there may not even be potential competitors. There seems to be trust on the
organisation as well.
10 ”…tämmöset maastokelposet mobiilit, tarkkailulaitteet, niin sehän on, se on niinku mielenkiintoinen niinkun aihealue. Ihan noin aiheenakin, se on kuitenkin tämmönen uutta luova, kehittyvä…”
69
5.2.5 Corporate brand associations
The associations about the corporate brand seem not to be clear in the organisation
and among its stakeholders and there exists many views about the organisation. Thus,
it can be said that the ideal idea of matching the identity and the image of the
organisation with corporate brand associations does not seem to fit to the case
company on hand. This may well be because of the lack of clarifying the ways and
principles of communicating, as well as the message communicated to outsiders of
the organisation.
What are then the associations about the organisation? According to the managing
director, the organisation can be attached to associations such as quite a good
reputation, fast and reliable actor, qualified work, trustful, customer oriented and
overall solution finder having a deep and versatile experience and know-how.
According to the employee, instead, the following associations are found: the
organisation is seen as a solution finder, having a good reputation in its own business
area, the products being easy to use, the solutions being affordable. The employee of
the organisation does not see himself as affecting to the associations about the
organisation. According to the managing director these associations are nevertheless
created through personnel, as well as through products and services, deliveries and
every action happening inside the organisation.
“That is, every operation done in this house which is seen outside.”11 (Managing Director)
According to the customer the organisation is seen as developing, entrepreneurial,
small, interesting, innovative, dynamic and ongoing as well as taking up gauntlets
and even being a bit risk taker. Some of these associations also personify to the
managing director of the organisation. There are also some thought which are a bit
doubtful, for example concerning the future of the organisation and thus there seems
to be a need for a better and more informative communication according to the
customer. There is this certain event with the employee in the well which has raised
strong associations about the organisation as doing what is necessary for customers.
11 ”Siis kaikki toimenpiteet mitä tässä talossa tehdään jotka näkyy ulospäin.”
70
All in all, the organisation raises positive thoughts in the mind of the customer and
she sees the corporate brand as blue and fresh.
“These are, so to speak, very positive thoughts.”12 (Customer)
It is kept important in the organisation that customers do not get the impression about
the organisation as not knowing what to do and not being able to do the work.
However, the communication about the organisation has not been clarified and
concentrated on the minds of the personnel, and thus the associations according to
the customer are not similar compared to those inside the organisation. There seems
not to be a clear vision and intention for certain associations even though
associations are seen as the ones selling. The only way to affect the associations in
the organisation seems to be the principle to do the work properly, to get things done.
5.2.6 Name of the organisation
The name of the organisation is seen as a possible development target in the case
company. There have been discussions about changing the name, but a conclusion of
a better name has not been found. The name is understood not to suit for
international markets and it is seen not as being on up to date. Thus, it seems that the
name of the organisation is seen important in the case company. Also, possibly
somewhat subconsciously, the name is equated to the corporate brand. The name in
general is seen as telling more than the letters it consists of, thus it is telling
something about the organisation. It seems that it is kept as a visualisation of the
corporate brand, kind of a link between the organisation and outsiders of the
organisation. The name reveals what the organisation does, what are its operations.
“The name tells already what it, in that house, in that organisation is done.”13 (Managing Director)
From customer’s point of view it is seen that the name is not suitable for the
organisation because it is not telling much about the organisation and what the
12 ”Että nää on niinku hyvinkin tämmösiä niinku sanotaan että positiivisia, positiivisia ajatuksia että.” 13 ”Nimi kertoo jo mitä se, siinä talossa, yrityksessä tehdään.”
71
organisation does. Also, the name is seen as too complicated. The name is equated to
associations about the organisation. Thus, it seems that also the customers see the
name parallel to the organisation and its operation. The name is seen as portraying
the wholeness of the business and the organisation, and thus the corporate brand.
The empirical analysis reveals that the name of the organisation may be a bit
troublesome and could be developed further. Nevertheless, the name is in general
seen as important and it also is a crucial part of the corporate brand because it tells
outsiders about the organisation. It can be said that the name of the organisation does
have an important meaning to corporate brand and indeed it is a component of
corporate brand equity. In this case, however, the name does not directly increase
corporate brand equity as such, but through the name being connected to the
organisation.
5.2.7 Actions of the organisation
The actions of the organisation as a whole are part of corporate brand equity. This
can also be seen, more or less visibly, in the analysis of other components of
corporate brand equity. Everything the organisation does, can affect its image and the
whole corporate brand. This includes of course the actions of people in the
organisation, as well as actions made under the name of the organisation, not
necessarily by certain people. According to the managing director the image of the
organisation has made up of ways of action in the organisation. These actions are not
probably done as, first of all, to build the corporate brand but to increase sales and
the profitability of the organisation, but they are still in a central role concerning the
corporate brand. This means that through the actions the corporate brand is affected
and builds up, even though the aim with these actions in the first place is not to build
it up. In the words of the managing director what relates to building the corporate
brand is every operation or action made in the organisation, especially those visible
to outsiders.
72
“I don’t see it so that it is some separate things, but all those actions which are made and anyone can see apart from those working in the organisation. That is then that building…”14 (Managing Director)
Some actions are the kind which can be affected and controlled throughout in the
organisation. These include such as being visible in the right places or not doing big
mistakes when communicating and operating with customers, keeping the promises
made to customers and in this way affecting the image and the brand of the
organisation. It seems that the personal selling and marketing done by the managing
director is the most important way of being seen for the organisation, and thus the
actions of the managing director in these situations should be thought as important
concerning the corporate brand also. Nevertheless, the managing director is not the
only one doing the actions, but everyone in the organisation is part of this.
“Well, as I noticed already every person in the organisation who is moving back and forth there outside these walls is part of the image of the organisation. If there our maintenance man makes mistakes and then the system explodes at customers place after the maintenance man has left then quite surely it has a negative effect to that our image, so that everyone affects it, as said.”15 (Managing Director)
On the other hand, some actions are such that they may not even be noticed in the
organisation as having any kind of effect. A good example of this is the employee of
the organisation in the well, finding for tools from the cold water they had dropped,
as meaning to customers that the organisation is customer oriented and willing to
help the customer in many ways. The managing director also acknowledges the
importance of tax payments as it would not look nice not to pay them, and it would
obviously affect the image of the organisation. In this way not only the appearance
and behaviour, but the wholeness of the organisation forms the image of it. What is
mentioned by the customer as an action which is wondering them is the organisation
joining the Ecofoster Group. This seems to be an action which has not been noticed
14 ”Mää en näe niinkö sitte että se ois jotain irrallisia juttuja, vaan ne kaikki toimenpiteet mitä tehdään jotka kuka tahansa näkee joka ei oo meijän firman palkkalistoilla. Niin se on sitä rakentamista sitte...” 15 ”No, no, kyllähän siis liittyyhän niinkö totesin niin taas kaikki meijän henkilöt jotka tuola heiluu tuola neljän seinän ulkopuolella, että jokanenhan siihen liittyy siihen kuvaan. Jos sielä meillä huoltomies tössii ja, tössii ja tuota niin niin asiakkaalla räjähtää systeemi sen jäläkeen kö huoltomies poistuu paikalta niin kyllähän sill on varmasti meleko negatiivinen vaikutus siihen (heh heh) meijän kuvaan että ihan jokanehan se vaikuttaa siihen, niinkö todettua.”
73
in the organisation as affecting the corporate brand, or at least it has not been made
clear to customers what the meaning of the action is.
It seems that the actions of the organisation are more or less linked to other
components of corporate brand equity, but it is still good to notice the role of actions
also as a separate component. It is partly a similar component as the name of the
organisation, in a way that it relates strongly to the organisation and is visible to
stakeholders. In this case, when the organisation is in many occasions doing tight co-
operation with customers for example with designing of the solution needed by the
customers, it seems that the actions are more visible to customers than might be the
case in another organisation.
5.2.8 Personnel
There are defined roles and remits in the personnel: one is responsible for office
work, one for research and development and one for maintenance and installations.
On the other hand it seems that in such a small organisation, the personnel has
versatile role and everyone is doing everything in the organisation. The ambiance in
the organisation seems to be convivial and the personnel get along. Certain sense of
solidarity seems to prevail in the organisation. There is a permanency and the
personnel have been the same already for years. Only a couple of changes have been
made in the personnel. The managing director believes a certain permanency is good,
so that the personnel know what to do and there is not always a need to teach the
personnel. This is seen important especially because of customers, with which the
personnel are dealing with. When the person does not change constantly, it brings
additional value to customers that they do not have to teach the same things over and
over again.
When asked what kind of person the managing director would like to hire, certain
features came up. These include being able to work in the field, understand
technology and capability to work in extreme conditions. In the words of the
managing director the person needs to be flexible, unprejudiced and eligible to learn
because he or she is taught to the job. The organisation seeks an expert in one field
and trains him or her then to a multiply skilled person suitable for the organisation.
74
Also the personnel acknowledge the need to survive from surprising situations and
mention that the work teaches how to do things accordingly.
According to the managing director, in such a small group of people in the
organisation, it is obvious that the guidelines and values of doing are evident to
everyone, and he sees that these are discussed repeatedly when working together day
by day. In his opinion it is also obvious to the personnel which are the definitions of
policies concerning for example on what kind of message about the organisation is
given to outsiders or what the reputation of the organisation is wanted to be like, as
the personnel is involved in making it. On the other hand the managing director
mentions that the personnel have to be continuously mentioned even about some
self-evident principles because they also affect the message given outside the
organisation. He also notices that these are the things which have to be taught to the
personnel even though he sees them as fundamentals which are obvious to every
reasonable human being.
The tasks in the organisation have been divided in a way that every member of the
personnel is in some way in contact with stakeholders. Everyone is in responsibility
of orders, as well as in contact with customers. It is case-specifically defined who is
the best person to deal with certain events or customers. This is done especially
because of the certain know-how and expertise between the personnel. Typically the
personnel are in contact with stakeholders by phone or by e-mail. The contacts are
usually dealt between same persons. This is because of the line of business and
products and the service being such complex. This means that the relationships
between the personnel and stakeholders may also become more and more personal.
For example with the customers such as Turveruukki Ltd, with which the
organisation is continuously dealing with, the relationships have developed to be
tight. There are also customers, with which the organisation is in contact about two to
three times a year. These relationships are not so tight, but still there is the tendency
to deal with the same person.
“These are then very loose but even then we always pursue, try to be in contact with the same person. Who understands what it is about so that we don’t have
75
to start to explain the whole procedure from the beginning.”16 (Managing Director)
Typical face to face contact between the personnel and the customer situates in the
field and concerns device maintenance. The employee of the organisation contacts
the customer, notifies him or her about the maintenance and inquires whether they
are willing to come and see the maintenance being done. Then in the field it is also
possible to discuss about current events and how the co-operation is working. The
employee comments that in these situations the communication between customers
can vary from the most severe to convivial small talk.
According to the managing director the image of the organisation has made up of
ways of action. This means that for example the behaviour of the personnel has to be
in shape. Indeed, the managing director sees that the whole personnel affect the
reputation and the image of the organisation starting from their clothing, behaviour,
communication and working style. The work has to be done well also because with
their actions the personnel affect the whole picture, whether it happens at work or at
free time. At this point the managing director also highlights that how the things are
seen by others is the truth in their minds. This means that for example the
atmosphere in the organisation is also affecting the reputation. If the customers think
people are at work in a bad mood, they start to wonder what is going on.
“Speaking, behaviour, going on in the world, clothing, car decals, everything what, which some walking out there can see with their eyes, hear with their ears and smell with their nose.”17 (Managing Director)
The personnel instead seem not to be aware of their role in the organisation. They are
not aware of the goals concerning the reputation of the organisation or how the
organisation wants to present itself. They also are not aware of the core values but
still believe they exist and want to identify to them, to those values they believe are
correct. It seems that they only have their own opinions guiding their behaviour. The
employee believes his communication does not really affect much and in his opinion 16 ”Ne on sitte tämmösiä hyvin väljiä mutta sillonki aina pyritään, yritetään ja ollaanki siihen samaan henkilöön yhteydessä. Joka ymmärtää että mistä on kysymys ettei tarvi alusta ruveta selevittään koko proseduuria läpi.” 17 ”Puhuminen, käyttäytyminen, kulukeminen maailmalla, pukeutuminen, auton mainosteippaukset, kaikki joka, jonka tuolla kanssakulkija voi silmillä nähdä, korvilla kuulla, tai nenällä haistaa.”
76
he is even communicating about the organisation somewhat little. He believes his
free time is not connected to work in any way and it does not affect the corporate
brand. On the other hand the employee sees the reputation of the organisation been
composed of hard work by the personnel and the owners. He sees the reputation as
lead by own work and presence and believes his own impact to the reputation is quite
considerable because he is the one in contact with the customers face to face and the
interaction is closer in this way.
“…if I don’t operate well or in a right way so then the reputation is not really good.”18 (Employee)
The customer also talks in many forms about personnel and their impact. Personnel
are the ones communicating knowledge about the organisation and the ones this
particular customer has gained most of her knowledge about the organisation from.
The employee, with whom the customer is most familiar with, Markku Määttä, is
strongly linked to the organisation, the same way as the managing director is, and his
role is seen by the customer as quite remarkable in the everyday operations. The
customer sees the employee as a busy, uncomplicated person who is capable of
taking care of things quickly when needed and who is working independently and
just the way he should. The customer sees the interaction open and uncomplicated
and is in contact with the organisation and its personnel even once in two weeks. It
seems that with this particular customer everyone in the organisation knows the
customers, and the customers know everyone in the organisation.
As already mentioned with few words, there is one particular event concerning the
personnel which the customer mentions and highlights. This is an event which
amuses and is thought back in the customer’s organisation repeatedly even though it
has happened in the early 2000’s and was actually only seen by only a few people. A
previous worker of the organisation, when working in the field with the customer,
jumped in to a well or some kind of a hole in the ground and was there with his feet
and all way down to his waist in cold water trying to find some tools from there. In
the customer’s organisation this is seen as reflecting EHP-Tekniikka Ltd.
18 ”…jos mää en toimi sielä oikein kautta hyvin niin sillonhan se maine ei oo oikein hyvä.”
77
“…that then if it is necessary they even go to stand in cold water if it is to a customer’s advantage”19 (Customer)
The other way personnel seem to affect the corporate brand is the feeling of stability
and resource scarcity. The customer acknowledges the organisation as having scarce
resources and in this way the personnel is the one mostly affecting the image about
the organisation, as there might not be too much money or resources for
advertisement campaigns or such. The customer sees that it could be beneficial to
have more support and more visible persons in the personnel, thus more people
working for the organisation. She also sees the amount of personnel as an increaser
of credibility, especially concerning the existence of the organisation.
All told, it seems clear that the personnel has an important role concerning corporate
brand and is indeed part of corporate brand equity, not only affecting with their
behaviour to the image of the organisation, but also affecting as part of the whole
picture about the organisation in many ways such as part of creating the atmosphere
in the organisation, or part of showing the quality of the organisation by their work,
as well as depicting the organisation as a stable and wealthy organisation. In this
organisation it seems that the personnel as a component of corporate brand equity has
not been noted and taken advantage of fully, even though the importance in some
levels is acknowledged.
5.2.9 Owner/manager
In the case company the managing director has a central role. He is responsible of
marketing and sales, but does also several other tasks in the organisation, from the
work of an assistant to the work of a managing director. And indeed, from the
customer’s point of view, the managing director is not only seen as a manager, but
also part of the personnel. Managing director is the most visible person for
stakeholders and outsiders of the organisation. The corporate brand or the image of
the organisation, as it is said in the case company, seems also to be in the
responsibility of managing director. In practice this means that the managing director
19 ”että sitte jos tarvii niin mennään vaikka kylmään veteen seisoskelemaan, jos se tuota on asiakkaan edun mukaista.”
78
takes care of things to be done and in that way the message sent outside the
organisation.
“How in practice at everyday level, what messages are being sent and in what we are present and how we appear and, yes, it is sort of my responsibility, mostly.”20 (Managing Director)
The managing director is not only responsible for the corporate brand or the image of
the organisation to outsiders, but also the personnel of the organisation see him as
communicating about the brand also to them, partly unconsciously. It seems that the
managing director is strongly linked to the organisation and indeed is the face of the
organisation and the corporate brand. The managing director gives the brand the face
and the physical appearance and is seen by customers as a representative of the
organisation. According to the customer, what comes in mind about the organisation
is personifying to the managing director and his personality.
“…Risto is, that he is, like it sort of feels like it is a one man’s company in that way, that it is. Quite clearly.”21 (Customer)
From the customer’s point of view the managing director is seen as a strong person,
who is enthusiastic about the products and product development and is actively
selling them and telling thoughts about the products. He is arising feelings and is
characterised in many words, some of which are hardworking, strong-minded,
preacher and dominating the organisation. He is respected by the customer and he is
seen as believing in what he is doing and as carrying the business onwards. It seems
that these characteristics of the managing director are even being connected to the
whole organisation, thus the organisation is the managing director. The impact of the
managing director is seen as great.
“…is not kind of hireling, but, but quite really as if lives the, lives through the success and progressing of the organisation”22 (Customer)
20 ”Miten se niinkö käytännön tasolla, jokapäiväisellä tasolla minkälaista viestiä annetaan ja missä ollaan mukana ja miten näytään ja kyllähän se sillon niinku minun vastuulla hyvin pitkälle on.” 21 ”Risto on, että se on, niinkun tavallaan lähes tuntuu et se on yhen miehen yritys sillain, että on. Ihan selkeästi.” 22 ”…ei ole tavallaan niinkun palkollinen, vaan vaan ihan oikeasti niinkun elää sen, elää sen tuota sen yrityksen niinkun menestymisen ja eteenpäinmenemisen kautta.”
79
The information about the products, the organisation and the corporate brand is
communicated to stakeholders in great amounts by the managing director. Because
the managing director is responsible for finding new customers, he is also the person
in contact with customers even from the first encounter, and after that numerous
times. Managing director is spreading the information and increasing the familiarity
of the corporate brand to stakeholders and others outside the organisation. He is seen
as a spokesperson, and the marketing of the organisation is strongly linked to the
managing director. The managing director is seen as a distinctive feature compared to
other organisations and he is also seen as critical factor to the continuity of the
entrepreneurship of the organisation. Even the corporate brand is seen as build upon
the managing director.
“Well, Risto has declared the one and only trueness, the right thing and in this way it has probably build on. Yes I see that it, it has build upon Risto…”23 (Customer)
For this particular customer the managing director was even one reason for starting
to do business with the organisation. Him being known beforehand by the customer,
it might have been a strong push factor for starting negotiations and in the first place
even being aware of the organisation and the possibilities it offers. The managing
director was the person revealing the business to the customer. It seems that there is a
strong relationship between the managing director and the customer, and it is not
only business-related, but also somewhat personal. The relationship is uncomplicated
and unreserved and the managing director is easily approachable for the customer. It
seems important for the customer that the relationship is the kind where you can
speak straight up and say what you mean. It is even seen as a significant part of the
whole co-operation between the companies, and the customer sees it might be a
problem for the co-operation if the managing director would change.
“Well Risto is the one quite clearly dominating the organisation. If he would suddenly be changed to someone other, that might cause trouble.”24 (Customer)
23 ”No, Risto on julistanut yhtä ainoaa oikeutta, oikeaa asiaa ja sitä kautta kai se on rakentunut. Kyl mä niinkun näen et se, se ois Riston, Riston varaan..” 24 ”Et kyllähän Risto on se joka hyvin voimakkaasti dominoi sitä yritystä, että. Et jos sen yhtäkkiä vaihtas johonkin toiseen niin vois olla hankaluuksia.”
80
All in all, it seems that, as based on theoretical background also, the owner or
manager or the managing director is indeed in central position and has a central role
concerning the corporate brand. From the customers point of view it is even seen as a
prerequisite of the organisation not dying that the managing director is a strong
person. The managing director is, somewhat similar as the name of the organisation,
something concrete which is connected to the corporate brand. He seems to be seen
as the visualisation or personification of the corporate brand and in this way is an
important component of corporate brand equity.
5.2.10 Corporate core values
It seems that the opinion and existence of corporate core values in the case company
is twofold. There are no written or clearly defined corporate core values in the
organisation. There are, nevertheless, certain unwritten principles, which are
expressed to the personnel by the managing director. These principles are guidelines
for everyday work and exist in the mind of the managing director. According to the
managing director it seems that the values are clear and understood well in the
organisation, but since they are not written, they are not institutional and well-
established. The personnel seem not to be quite sure which actually are the core
values and they only have a hint about them based on discussions with the managing
director, as well as discussions heard elsewhere.
“Well, if you think about such fancy values which are written in the board and being thought out in a seminar for two days, so there is none.”25 (Managing Director)
“Values. Okay, I guess there are and what I think they are is like some trustworthiness, easiness, well maybe certainty is part of trustworthiness…”26 (Employee)
On the other hand it is acknowledged by the managing director that corporate core
values exist in the organisation indirectly through the goals of the business. The
25 ”No, siis jos ajatellaan semmosia hienoja arvoja jotka ois kirjotettu taululle ja niitä pari päivää seminaarissa puitu, niin ei ole.” 26 ”Arvot. Jaahah, on varmaan ja sen mitä luulen että on niin ne on niinku joku luotettavuus, helppous, no ehkä varmuuskin kuuluu siihen luotettavuuteenkin…”
81
managing director strongly holds the view that it is not necessary to write down or
define corporate core values but the idea is to keep it simple. On the other hand he
argues that the core values are the same as the goals of business, and they are guiding
the operations in the organisation. It is thought that without the core values the
business in not working and there is no business. Thus, it seems that the core values
are the same as goals of business or the unwritten principles guiding the operations.
Core values which frequently come up subconsciously through these principles and
goals of business, from what the managing director tells about the business, are such
as being trustworthy, of good quality, quick in operations and having a deep, versatile
know-how. Being quick in operations is not only about operating fast, but it also
means that the organisation is trying to solve the problems beforehand, think ahead
and act initiatively. Fairness is also mentioned repeatedly. These features of the
business are according to the managing director constantly being developed and
prepared and in this way the aim is to gain reputation and build business operations.
“Well, what I said already, what is important concerning our business operations is that there is those features which we should be capable of doing, meaning price, quickness, the quality of customer service or after sales and technical know-how.”27 (Managing Director)
What is extremely interesting concerning corporate core values is that even though
they are not well established and may not be seen as supremely important, it seems
that the core values and their importance is highly acknowledged concerning the
image and reputation of the organisation. According to the managing director, the
ways of action and the working culture of the organisation are specified through the
core values and this way they affect the image of the organisation as well. Also the
employee of the organisation acknowledges the importance and sees the core values
as having a great impact on reputation. The core values, or the ones thought to be
core values by the personnel are seen important also personally and the values are
also personal values of personnel, guiding behaviour and communication. It can be
said that the corporate core values are indeed part of corporate brand also.
27 ”No mitä tuossa sanoin tuossa mikä on meidän liiketoiminnan kannalta tärkeää että ne on ne ominaisuudet joihin meidän pitää pystyä, siis tää hinta, nopeus, asiakaspalvelun tai after salesin laatu ja tekninen osaaminen.”
82
“I mean, they have a big, really big impact those three what we said. When we after all are such a small organisation that if some customer gets the reputation about us that we don’t know or are not able to do what we say and our device don’t work, then it kills the whole business at a moments’ notice.”28 (Employee)
It seems that core values exist to some extent, but only in the background and mostly
in the mind of the managing director. It seems that they at least affect the way people
behave and in this way are seen also by stakeholders. However, the customer in this
study was not aware of corporate core values existing and was wishing that if there
are values, they should and could be visible also to customers and especially in
communication with customers. Nevertheless, corporate core values affect the whole
picture about the organisation and the corporate brand. Corporate core values and
their role are not wholly pieced together, but when thought about more deeply, their
importance seems to rise. All in all, it seems that the organisation has not clarified
and defined and may not even be assure about the core values, but they still exist in
the organisation, although somewhat ambiguously. Concerning the corporate brand,
corporate core values seem to be important. They are one cornerstone of corporate
brand equity through their impact on the image and identity of the organisation and
the corporate brand. In this case company the corporate core values seem not to be
benefited wholly and could be a bigger increaser of corporate brand equity if
clarified and communicated more precisely.
5.2.11 Organisational culture
Organisational culture has already been touched in the previous chapters because it is
part of core values and their realisation in the organisation, and it also is linked to
personnel as executing and living it. Nevertheless, organisational culture is even
more.
The organisational culture can be seen as how things are done in the organisation. In
this way it is linked to the corporate brand also. For example when discussing about
28 ”Siis niillähän on iso, todella iso merkitys nuilla kolomella mitä me sanottiin että. Kun me kuitenkin ollaan niin pieni firma että jos joku asiakas saapi meistä semmosen maineen että me ei tiedetä taikka osata tehdä mitä me sanotaan ja meijän laitteet ei pellaa niin sehän tappaa koko meijän homman saman tien.”
83
the reputation of the organisation, the managing director instantly connects it with
how the work is done in the organisation. According to him, there have been no big
mistakes done, and this way the reputation of the organisation should be quite good.
Features such as supplying the device in time, taking care of the customers and their
problems and even doing them more than has been promised come up. With these
actions the organisation tries to affect its reputation. According to the managing
director, the reputation of the organisation has built up trough ways of operating.
This is also agreed by the employee, who believes the reputation has built up by hard
work of both the personnel and the owners of the organisation; by own work and
appearance everyone is affecting the reputation.
“It has built up, through our ways of working. We have tried to do business, and business cannot be done without certain things such as quality, price, time of delivery and the behaviour of personnel in shape. So we have with this way started and this way the reputation or the brand builds up…”29 (Managing Director)
In the organisation it is believed that through this way the reputation builds up aside
and it should not be thought about too much but instead it should be taken care of
that the business is done the right way, even though it is realised that the image of the
organisation is affected through the ways of working. Part of doing the business right
is the principle of keeping it simple, which seems to be in an important role in the
organisation. The managing director seems to guide the behaviour and doing of
things in the organisation with simple guidelines which are told to personnel now and
then. The guidelines include such as keeping what has been promised, doing a work
of good quality and trying to work before and not after problems have occurred. It is
also said by the managing director that there are no certain ways of doing but only
normal norms of behaviour are guiding the way of working, even though not even
these are spelled to the personnel but it is supposed that these are understood by
everyone. According to him it should be understood in the organisation how to act
and work, because it should be self-evident to everyone.
29 ”Se on rakentunut, toimintatapojen kautta. Että on pyritty tekemään bisnestä, ja bisnestä ei voi tehdä jos eri näköset asiat kuten laatu, hinta, toimitusajat ja porukan käyttäytyminen ei oo kunnossa niin se on niinkö sieltä kautta lähetty ja se sitten rakentuu sitä kautta se maine tai brändi…”
84
Also the personnel acknowledge that there are no certain official policies of doing
things, but instead every normal person should understand how to work. This
includes for instance the way of communicating with outsiders of the organisation,
the understanding and outlining of bigger picture and behaving accordingly. It is also
said that the ways of working are learned through working. Also the managing
director acknowledges that it has to be taught what is important in the organisation,
and to which things the personnel should pay attention to. And indeed, in the
organisation every project is different and there is no routine way of doing things, but
inside the project everyone knows what to do. According to the employee, these all
are assumptions and not told directly. These are the kind of principles which are hard
to tell about, because they are not so visible or evident, nor spoken aloud.
“Yes, assumptions, they are not told in that way. It is not said that you should say “sir” to every customer. Just normal behaviour norms.”30 (Employee)
Concerning the ways of communicating with customers, it seems that the principle is
the same and there are no well defined policies. What is spoken with the personnel
according to the managing director is that the customer should be listened to and the
starting point is that the customer is right, thus there is a certain principle of serving
the customers. According to the managing director, the feedback from customers
guides greatly the work done in the organisation. The customer also seems to
acknowledge the customer orientation. The personnel sees the way of
communicating with customers been the kind of learning path, in a way that it is not
actually told by anyone how you should behave, but instead you have learned by
yourself how to behave when being in contact with the customers.
“It depends on the customer, so that it can be very serious, in a serious base, or then it can be very genial. So, at least I have the habit of first being a bit more official in the things and then how the customer reacts to it and how he or she speaks, then I may change it. So that if the other suggests calling each other by first name in the first sentence already, then I don’t use sir after that. It depends on with whom you are working with.”31 (Employee)
30 ”Joo siis oletuksena, ei oo kerrottu kyllä sillä lailla että. Ei oo sanottu että pittää herrotella joka ikistä asiakasta, että. Ihan yleisiä käyttäytymissääntöjä.” 31 ”Se vähän riippuu asiakkaasta, että se voi olla hyvinkin vakavaa, vakavalla pohjalla olevaa, tai sitten hyvinkin lepposaa. Että tuota, mulla ainaki on itellä semmonen tapa että mä nyt ensin otan vähän semmosen virallisemman puolen siihen hommaan että sitten miten asiakas siihen reagoi ja miten hän puhuu, niin sitten ruvetaan muuttamaan sitä. Että jos toinen ehottelee sinunkauppoja jo
85
There are also certain routines related to working, which are guiding the ways of
working. These routines are part of everyday life in the organisation, and are
understood as axiomatic. For instance the year is divided into four parts, and within
these parts there are certain tasks to be handled, such as spring or autumn
maintenance. It means that it is known in the organisation beforehand, what is going
to happen in the next four to six months. There are also different routines, such as
Friday being an office day, a day for doing reports or briefings about problems in the
device given to customers in written. These routines also include certain persons
responsible of certain tasks, and are seen to customer for example in a way that she
or he always deals with the same persons.
Even though the core values in the organisation seem not to be well defined, they are
guiding the ways of working and thus executing the core values is part of
organisational culture. For instance the personnel understand the core values and
their meaning as guiding the behaviour in a way that at work you should be accurate.
According to the managing director, through the core values the way of action and
the organisational culture in the organisation are defined and through this way the
image of the organisation is affected. It is essential that the core values guide the way
of working in as such way that the image of the organisation is not damaged. In this
way, the organisational culture is very central and essential part of corporate brand
equity.
“If the work is up the creek, then also the image of the organisation is such that the organisation is up the creek.”32 (Managing Director)
All in all, it can be said that the organisational culture in the organisation is not so
guided, but instead it is taken for granted that people should know how to behave.
The atmosphere in the organisation is said to be quite relaxed and immediate, even
though busy. People are used to working quite independently, and this may be one
reason for the organisational culture to be the kind of not guided. At the same,
personnel are often reminded of the unwritten policies of working by the managing
ensimmäisessä lauseessa niin ei enää herrotella sen jäläkeen mutta tuota. Se on vähän riippuvainen siitä kenen kanssa on tekemisissä.” 32 ”Elikkä jos me toimitaan päin seiniä, niin kyllähän se kuvakin sitte firmasta on että tuo on päin seiniä toimiva firma.”
86
director. Thus, it seems that there are certain unspoken principles, which are not
totally acknowledged in the organisation, but they are constantly guiding the
behaviour and ways of working. It seems that the importance and role of
organisational culture seems not to be understood clearly and it has not been realised
as affecting the corporate brand. Nevertheless, it can be seen having an effect, and
thus the organisational culture is indeed a component of corporate brand equity.
5.2.12 Product or service
The organisation seems to highlight that it wants to be, first of all, the overall
problem solver for customers by designing, delivering and executing overall systems
and solutions. The organisation does not want to be seen as a device supplier,
because the device is only part of the solution. Nevertheless, exactly the quality and
price of the product, besides its maintenance service, are said to be the features
distinguishing EHP-Tekniikka Ltd from its competitors and other organisations. In
this context also the easiness and usability of the product are seen as distinguishing
features. Also the features which are in the organisation seen as important concerning
the business operations are those linked to product and service: price, quickness, the
quality of service or maintenance and technical know-how. These features are seen
extremely important because they are believed to be part of the message about the
organisation to outsiders.
“…those do not matter a thing if the product is not in good shape. It is the one which sells; it shapes up the final picture and the reputation in the eyes of customers out there.”33 (Managing Director)
Also the customer acknowledges that the organisation is and wants to be seen as
offering solutions and services and not only selling products. It seems that even
though this is seen important in the organisation, it seems to customers that the
organisation is still more or less actually selling products, and could concentrate even
more to developing the image of solving the problems of customers. It is seen that
the organisation has corporate brand because of its unique products and concept of
services. It is seen also by the customer that what separates EHP-Tekniikka Ltd from 33 ”…niillä ei oo mitään merkitystä jos tuote ei ole kunnossa, se myy, se tuo sitte sen lopullisen mielikuvan ja sen maineen ja sen referenssin tuola asiakkaitten silmissä.”
87
its competitors is their service concept and products, which are designed and tested
and are proper solutions.
According to the managing director it is seen that products, product packages and the
business are the most important, and only then the corporate brand can be made upon
them. According to the managing director there is one product, the datalocker,
around which the whole business builds. The datalocker is also acknowledged by the
customer as a unique product. Indeed, the image of the organisation is strongly seen
as linked to the products of the organisation. When asked of which parts the image
combines of, the product and its features such as delivery on time and functioning
came up. Services are also seen as part of the image of the organisation. The
employee of the organisation even sees products and their features as truly part of the
corporate brand. The image of the organisation is seen as starting to shape up from
the first delivery to a customer.
“Each and every element and component made inside these walls, they all affect the picture. Or reputation, whatever you want to call it.”34 (Managing Director)
Also the customer sees products as an important part of the organisation and its
reputation. Wireless data transmission comes up when discussing about the
organisation and its features. It also seems that the customer sees the organisation as
strongly customer orientated because of the development of devices according to
customer needs. Concerning the reputation more deeply, the customer sees the
functioning and certainty of devices as linked to the reputation of the organisation
and the reputation being positive or negative. Because the organisation is not only
selling device but the customer is more connected to the organisation through
services concerning the device, it is seen as very important that the organisation is
seen as trustworthy and stable.
Indeed, products seem to have been in an important role also between the
organisation, its customer and their co-operation. It seems that the co-operation is
strongly connected to product development, and the reason why the customer in the 34 ”Joka ainut elementti ja komponentti mitä tässä meidän seinien sisällä tehdään niin kaikkihan ne rakentaa sitä kuvaa. Tai mainetta, miksi sen nyt sitte haluaaki laittaa.”
88
first place wanted to have EHP-Tekniikka Ltd as a partner was also because of the
products. The customer sees their organisation as wanting to try new innovations
which could help their operations in the field in the future. Turveruukki Ltd is also in
important role concerning the products because it was the first customer and this is
the reason why it is often asked about the products, their functioning and their quality
by others, potential customers or authorities. The customer sees the products as
creating new and developing, as a mobile solution for field and the co-operation
between the organisations is unique in a way that the customer does not have other
this kind of relationships. The relationship is also seen as unique in another way,
building the image of the industry and the organisation.
“That it is also a little bit this kind of our image building also through these EHP devices.”35 (Customer)
The products and services are also often linked indirectly to corporate brand equity
by being linked to other components of it. The name of the organisation is believed
to tell what the organisation does, within the deliveries to customers the image of the
organisation can increase and become better and what the customers think about the
organisation is thought to relate to products and services of the organisation.
Feedback from customers has been asked concerning products and services and
because of the maintenance of products being part of the business, contact with
customers is continuous. Finally, also the core values of the organisation are seen as
to be linked to products in a way that if the organisation does not deliver products in
time the image of the organisation is not good.
It seems that the products and services of the organisation seem to have an important
meaning concerning the corporate brand equity. This may well be because of their
concrete nature and the easiness of seeing and feeling them. They are easily
accessible and are indeed seen by the customers, and thus the associations about
them are easily made and also connected to the whole organisation, its image and
reputation. It seems that this is seen quite clearly in the organisation, but it is still
unclear whether the importance and role of products and services is really understood
35 ”Et se on pikkusen tämmöstä meidänkin imagon rakentamista tän, näiden EHP-laitteiden kautta.”
89
and taken advantage of in the organisation. Thus, products and services are part of
corporate brand equity, but could still be used more as a part of this.
5.3 Results of the empirical research
In this study the empirical research and the analysis support the theoretical
framework, but also some alteration was made for the model to match the empirical
data. There were found both the external and the internal components, and also the
role of corporate brand equity assets was acknowledged on the basis of the analysis.
Based on the empirical research it seems that the final model is suitable for depicting
corporate brand equity and its components in the environment of small enterprise
operating in the business area of environmental technology. The components can be
divided to external and internal components of corporate brand equity. The external
component is stakeholders; internal components on the other hand include the name
and actions of the organisation as well as the personnel, manager, corporate core
values, organisational culture and the product and/or the services of the organisation.
The analysis of the embodiment of components of corporate brand equity is summed
up in a table (see appendix 5). The table includes the categorisation of the analysis
and the embodiment is more precisely presented in the text.
5.3.1 External components of corporate brand equity in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The empirical research revealed stakeholders to be of great importance for the
corporate brand and thus they can obviously be seen as an important part of
corporate brand equity. According to the empirical research it can be said that
stakeholders are the external component of corporate brand equity. They have a
meaningful role in the existence and development of corporate brand equity through
the co-operation and its effects to the corporate brand, as giving feedback and in this
way affecting the brand and also as communicating and informing about the
corporate brand to others. The co-operation affects the way the organisation
functions and to what kind of organisation it develops and thus the impact of
stakeholders is indeed deep. It seems that the organisation has tight and lasting
relationships especially to its customers and thus the impact of them to the corporate
brand equity is also constant.
90
In this study the external assets of corporate brand are seen as part of the
stakeholders and a way for them to evaluate and see corporate brand equity. The
external assets examined in this study were corporate brand loyalty, corporate brand
awareness, perceived quality of corporate brand and corporate brand associations.
Other brand assets were left aside because of them being more concrete and thus
different from the other assets. This study assumes that the external assets of
corporate brand equity are the same as the assets used in product branding, and only
the content may vary. In this study the attention was therefore not paid first of all to
these assets and the aim was only to improve the understanding of them in the
context of corporate brand equity. Furthermore, the understanding of these assets is
indeed a bit different when compared to product branding, as they are in product
branding understood as building up the brand equity, and in this study instead they
are seen as ways of seeing and evaluating the corporate brand equity. Thus, the
understanding of the assets is a bit different from what has been used previously.
The findings of the study point out that the previous findings concerning brand
equity can also be found in the case of corporate brand equity, and the difference is
only that there is not only a certain product, but the whole organisation affects the
assets. Thus, corporate brand loyalty, corporate brand awareness, perceived quality of
the corporate brand and corporate brand associations were found in this study. These
assets are a way for the stakeholders to examine, to see and to evaluate the
organisation or the corporate brand, and thus the assets relate strongly to the external
component of stakeholders. The finding of seven components of corporate brand
equity inside the organisation - the name and actions of the organisation, personnel,
manager, corporate core values, organisational culture and product and/or services of
the organisation - and one component, stakeholders, in the external environment
supports the idea of corporate brand equity assets being only a certain way of
understanding and explaining corporate brand equity and not being concrete
components of corporate brand equity. In this case this was particularly seen in the
case of the customer.
91
5.3.2 Internal components of corporate brand equity in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
The empirical research revealed seven internal components of corporate brand equity
inside the organisation. These factors are the name and the actions of the
organisation, personnel, manager, corporate core values, organisational culture, and
product and/or services of the organisation. Based on the empirical research, the
name and the actions of the organisation are understood to be a bit different
components from others since they are affecting more on the background and in a
way that the effects to corporate brand equity emerge through them. This is seen in
the final model, but however the role of name and actions is not such different that it
should be highlighted more.
The name of the organisation is the visualisation of the corporate brand and it is first
of all connected to the corporate brand. Through the name the corporate brand tells
about the organisation and its operations and in this way, being connected to the
corporate brand, the name is a component of corporate brand equity. The actions of
the organisation have partly a similar role as the name, since they are a component
which is revealing everything and anything about the organisation to outsiders. It can
have multiple different meanings depending on who is seeing the actions, and if they
are judged as positive or negative. In this way actions of the organisation together
with the name are part of the basis of the corporate brand equity.
Because of the central role of the managing director it can be said that he has a great
impact on corporate brand equity. He is mostly visible to outsiders as well as
communicating about the corporate brand inside the organisation, and he is also seen
as the personification of the brand. The corporate brand is also on his responsibility.
Personnel are also seen to be visible to outsiders and in this way are affecting the
corporate brand equity. With their communication and actions they communicate
about the corporate brand also. Since this communication and behaviour is based on
corporate core values, which are not written or well defined but still exist in the
organisation, they are also part of corporate brand equity. With organisational culture
the core values are tied to the organisation, and thus also organisational culture is
part of corporate brand equity. Products and services are concretely telling about the
92
organisation, and are also extremely visible to customers and other stakeholders.
Thus, they are also part of corporate brand equity.
Based on the analysis it seems that the role of different aspects of components may
well be overlapping and the components are related to each other in multiple ways.
This means that for example feedback may be part of stakeholders or on the other
hand part of products and services. In the analysis certain facts were repeated in
several components, and this was done to show the overlapping more concretely. It is
also seen in the analysis that everything which is concrete by its nature is more easily
connected to the corporate brand compared to those components more intangible.
Thus, the role of corporate core values and organisational culture is not such easily
connected to the brand, even though their importance is also acknowledged, yet not
always clearly. Even though the concrete components were more easily connected to
the corporate brand, it seems that also the intangible components have an equally
important role concerning the corporate brand equity. Indeed, together all these
components create the corporate brand equity.
Finally, the model of corporate brand equity components is presented (figure 6). The
model is, based on the theoretical framework and the empirical research, divided to
internal and external components – to corporate identity and corporate image.
Together they constitute the corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized
enterprises.
93
CO
RPO
RA
TE B
RA
ND
EQ
UIT
Y
Corporate core values
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Stakeholders
Product/service
Name of the organisationEvery action the organisation takes
ManagerPersonnel
- Brand loyalty- Brand awareness- Perceived quality- Brand associations
CORPORATE IDENTITY
CORPORATE IMAGE
Organisational culture
CO
RPO
RA
TE B
RA
ND
EQ
UIT
Y
Corporate core values
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Stakeholders
Product/service
Name of the organisationEvery action the organisation takes
ManagerPersonnel
- Brand loyalty- Brand awareness- Perceived quality- Brand associations
CORPORATE IDENTITY
CORPORATE IMAGE
Organisational culture
Figure 6. Components of corporate brand equity in SMEs
94
6 CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter the study is summed up and theoretical contributions are presented, as
well as the managerial implications and limitations of the study. Suggestions for
future research are also given.
6.1 Summary
This study has been investigating corporate brand equity in a small enterprise
through finding components of the corporate brand equity in the organisation. The
aim of this research was to find out the components of corporate brand equity in
small and medium-sized enterprises in order to understand corporate brand equity
and its key components better in the environment of small and medium-sized
enterprises. The research area is a previously understudied phenomenon and thus it
was seen very important to gain knowledge about it. The aim was aspired to reach by
combining the previous literature concerning product and corporate branding,
branding in SMEs, and branding and SME literature in general, in order to shape up
the theoretical framework of the study. The empirical research consisted of a single
case study, conducted in a small organisation concentrated on environmental
technology. In the empirical research a total of three interviews were done not only
with the representatives of the organisation, but also with a customer.
The answer to research questions is found in the final framework of the study,
illustrated in figure 6 (see page 93). The main research question was: What does
corporate brand equity in SMEs constitute of? The main research question was
answered through three sub questions. The first sub question was: What are the
internal components of corporate brand equity in SMEs?, the second sub question
was: What are the external components of corporate brand equity in SMEs?, and the
final sub question was: What is the embodiment of these components in SMEs? The
final framework has been supplemented with the findings of the empirical research
and in this way the theoretical framework was adapted to its final shape.
According to the study, corporate brand equity consists of internal and external
components. The corporate brand equity can be said to exist in the internal and
95
external environment of the organisation – the identity and the image of the corporate
brand. External component of corporate brand equity is stakeholders. Part of this is
also corporate brand equity assets, which is a way for the stakeholders to see and
evaluate the corporate brand. Corporate brand equity assets are corporate brand
loyalty, corporate brand associations, corporate brand awareness and perceived
quality of the corporate brand. The internal components of corporate brand equity on
the other hand are the name and actions of the organisation, personnel, manager,
personnel, corporate core values, organisational culture and product and/or services
of the organisation. The role of these internal and external components is important
in the organisation as they constitute the corporate brand equity and through them the
organisation can affect its corporate brand equity. The role of these components is
also overlapping, as they are all connected to each other in multiple ways.
6.2 Theoretical contributions
The findings of the study reveal new knowledge concerning corporate branding,
corporate brand equity and branding in SMEs. The area of research as such is new,
and thus only limited amount of comparison to existing literature on the topic can be
made. In general it seems that the study confirms the existing notions about the topic.
For example, what seems notable concerning corporate branding in general in small
and medium-sized enterprises is the fact that as already theoretically grounded (see
e.g. Gilmore et al. 2001), indeed branding in SMEs is often an informal process, and
in this case it is not even noted in the organisation as happening, or the organisation
even having a corporate brand. It has also been noted in previous theory that SMEs
may not realise being capable of having a brand (see e.g. Merrilees 2007; Krake
2005). The case in this study confirms that it is seen, from the organisation’s point of
view, that the organisation does not really have a brand and the brand is only familiar
with customers. It seems that it is not understood or realised that the brand can exist
within the customers. Customers on the other hand recognise the organisation having
a brand. And it is also recognised in the organisation that the aim is to build a picture
of the organisation in the minds of existing and potential customers. Thus, there
seems to be a bit of a paradox in the understanding of and about the corporate brand.
96
As has been previously noted (see e.g. Abimbola & Vallaster 2007; Ahonen 2008),
the study confirms the possible lack of resources in SMEs. This seems to be the case
also with branding, as smaller organisations may not be able to use the full potential
of branding due to lack of resources concerning time, money and amount of
personnel. It has also been noted that the different levels of branding may not be
separable in SMEs (see e.g. Ojasalo et al. 2008), and this was also supported in the
study as product and/or services are clearly linked to corporate brand. Thus, the line
between these seems not to be clear in SMEs.
What is notable in the environment of SMEs is that as corporate brand literature
suggests corporate branding to be systematically planned and executed process
(Einwiller & Will 2002), this is not the case in the case company. Instead, corporate
branding has not been benefited fully, nor is it fully understood and taken advantage
of in the case company. Similarly, the study does not fully support corporate brand
building to be done with including the whole organisation (see e.g. Bergstrom et al.
2002), as for instance in the case company the personnel seem not to be fully aware
of the corporate brand and its components such as core values or principles of
working (organisational culture). All in all it seems that the environment of SMEs,
especially related to corporate branding, seems clearly different from the
environment of larger organisation. This may explain the differences found in the
study, compared to existing literature on corporate branding, as corporate branding
has been previously examined in the environment of larger organisations.
The main theoretical contribution of this study is the framework of components of
corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises. The research area is a
phenomenon which has not been previously studied as such, and thus the model in
itself reveals totally new knowledge about the research topic. Corporate brand equity
as such has not been previously researched in the area of corporate brand nor in the
environment of small and medium-sized enterprises. In this study the findings point
out to the existence of external and internal components of corporate brand equity in
SMEs. The empirical analysis revealed seven components of corporate brand equity
in SMEs, which as such have not been previously connected to corporate brand
equity, or to brand equity at all. The components are stakeholders, the name and the
actions of the organisation, personnel, manager, corporate core values, organisational
97
culture and product and/or services of the organisation. Mostly the empirical research
supported the conclusions made in the theoretical part of the study. However, the
empirical analysis revealed a component which was not found from the theoretical
framework. This component was product and/or service.
Even though the components of corporate brand equity as such have not been linked
to corporate brand equity, they have been studied previously in the area of corporate
branding and branding in SMEs. The study clearly supports the important role of
personnel, as has been noted before in the literature concerning corporate branding
and branding in SMEs (see e.g. de Chernatory & Cottam 2008; Balmer & Gray 2003;
Ojasalo et al. 2008). Also, the role of manager as a key person of SMEs has been
noted before (see e.g. Abimbola & Vallaster 2007), as well as the impact of
stakeholders to corporate branding (see e.g. Leitch & Richardson 2003). Thus, the
study confirms this and emphasises the meaning of personnel, manager and
stakeholders even more especially concerning corporate brand equity. Also, the link
between personal values of personnel and brand values of the organisation (Harris &
de Chernatory 2001) is supported in the study. Moreover, the characteristics of the
manager are indeed supported in the study, as has been noted by Watson et al.
(1998).
Concerning brand equity and its multiple definitions, the study clearly supports the
idea of the link brand equity has with brand’s name and symbol (see e.g. Aaker
1992b, 216). Also, previous literature has connected brand equity to product or
service (ibid.), and this can be seen to be true also concerning corporate brand equity.
Keller (2000, 115) has defined corporate brand equity as the sum of results formed
by any action made under the corporation, and this was indeed confirmed in the
study. The study also supports the existence of brand assets in the context of
corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises. The study confirms
that previous findings of brand equity assets (see e.g. Aaker 1996) can be connected
also to corporate brand equity, even though brand equity assets may not be fully
similar in the environment of product and corporate brands.
The knowledge found in the study is totally new concerning corporate brand equity
in the environment of small and medium-sized enterprises. Thus, this study can in the
98
future help researchers to understand the formation of corporate brand equity in
small and medium-sized enterprises through the components of it. Corporate brand
equity in SMEs as such has not been previously studied empirically, and thus the
knowledge of the study gives totally new implications concerning the phenomenon.
6.3 Managerial implications
Before this study there has been little if any knowledge for management about
corporate brand equity in small and medium-sized enterprises. Thus, this study may
provide important new knowledge for small and medium-sized enterprises
concerning their corporate brand and corporate brand equity. Through understanding
and being aware of the corporate brand equity components, managers are able to take
advantage of the corporate brand and increase corporate brand equity by affecting the
operations of their organisations and in this way the components of corporate brand
equity. It is important for managers to understand the value of corporate brand equity
also in the environment of small and medium-sized enterprises.
It seems that the organisation in this study now concentrates most of all to sales. It is
seen important that managers would also pay some concern to marketing,
communication and branding since they also contribute to sales. Business operations
of the organisation in this study are seen as to be much more than the corporate brand
and this may lead the understanding about the brand to wrong direction as it may be
seen as a totally separate piece and not part of the business operations. Thus, the
advice to managers is to think about corporate brand more and even to internalise it
as part of the business operations in the organisation. This means that the brand could
be taken into account more often and indeed it would be important to connect it to
business operations and not to think of it separately.
Based on this study it can be said that the communication about organisations and
their corporate brands could be made clearer for example by making sure that the
message sent to outsiders is well-defined and congruent and that everyone is sending
the same message. Managers should communicate more about the brands to
stakeholders, keeping in mind especially the existing customers. Managers should
first make sure that the vision, mission and the core values of the organisation are
99
clear and understood by everyone inside the organisation. By clarifying vision,
mission and core values to personnel the message sent to outsiders of the
organisation could also clarify. When the personnel are well aware of the
organisation and its goals, also the customers can be more aware of these. Now it is
seen in the organisation of the study by the managing director, that for example the
core values and guidelines of working are clear to everyone in the organisation, but
according to this study, they are actually not such clearly seen and understood by the
personnel. Thus, it is important for the managers to make sure the personnel actually
understand the core values and principles of working.
In the organisation it seems that the components of corporate brand equity are not
clearly outlined and understood. For managers it should be important to outline and
make sure the components of corporate brand equity are understood by everyone in
the organisation. Keeping in mind the components of corporate brand equity and
making use of them in the corporate brand building could be very beneficial to gain
the advantages of corporate branding. Managers should also make corporate brand
more visible and part of the everyday work in the organisations. Managers should
keep in mind to try to benefit from corporate brand constantly and more precisely by
taking it as part of the everyday business.
6.4 Limitations of the study
Variations between industries and companies within industries exist (Knox 2004).
This study was conducted in an organisation concentrated on environmental
technology and the environment of the organisation may differ from other
organisations operating in different areas of business. Thus, it is not clear whether the
framework is suitable to wider use and in different areas of business. Also, the use of
more than one case company could increase the understanding of the phenomenon,
for example with wider amount of data and a wider perspective on the topic. Due to
lack of resources such as time and money, there was also only one customer
interview in the research, and the conclusions could vary and there could have been
more knowledge concerning the phenomenon if more customers or more groups of
stakeholders had been interviewed.
100
The study was conducted in a clearly small organisation and thus it is not obvious if
the model suits to bigger, medium-sized organisations as well. Nevertheless, the
model is seen to be general enough to suit also the environment of bigger
organisations than the one in this study. Since the role of the researcher was central in
the study and analysis, it can be said that the researcher had a critical role in the
formation of the final framework. The understanding of the researcher was strongly
affecting the outcome of the research.
The study was also constrained by the methods chosen. In collecting the data, it is
possible that the interviewees were not always truthful for their soul, but said for
example what they believed was expected to be heard. Also, the generalisation of the
findings of the study is constrained by the methods as with qualitative case study
research the aim is towards analytical generalisations and not to a wider
generalisation.
6.5 Reliability and validity
In this study, the concepts of reliability and validity are used to evaluate the research
and its quality. The accessing is done in order to see if the research and conclusions
of it can be relied on (Koskinen et al. 2005, 253). It is important to acknowledge and
be familiar with the concepts, for they are the tools for increasing the quality of the
research (ibid.). Reliability and validity have been used in quantitative research and
are seen to be more suitable for analysing the quality of quantitative research
(Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 217). However, it is important also to evaluate the quality of
qualitative research and for there is no better way to evaluate it, the concepts of
reliability and validity are used for it. In qualitative research the meaning of
reliability and validity differ from the understanding of the concepts in quantitative
research (Hirsjärvi et al.2006, 217). Yin (2003, 34) presents four design tests to
establish the quality of case study research. These are construct validity, internal
validity, external validity and reliability (ibid.).
In qualitative research the concept of validity is understood as the width of the
certain statement, interpretation or the finding as expressing the target which is
aimed to be expressed by them. Construct validity is understood as the use of correct
101
measures for examining the concepts, and internal validity refers to the internal logic
and harmony of the interpretation. External validity on the other hand means the
ability to generalise the interpretations out of their context. (Koskinen et al. 2005,
254; Yin 2003, 34.)
Reliability in qualitative research is understood as the repeatability of the study
(Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 216) and the actions of the researcher (Hirsjärvi & Hurme
2000, 189). In qualitative research, the researcher itself is the central instrument of
the research and thus he or she is also the main criteria for the reliability of the
research (Eskola & Suoranta 1998, 211). It is important to document the research in a
way that it can be evaluated by others (Koskinen et al. 2005, 257), since the
interpretation and conclusions are dependent on the actions of the researcher,
In qualitative research construct validity can be increased for instance by using
multiple sources of evidence, by establishing a chain of evidence, defining carefully
the research object and by making sure that the research methods used are suitable
for the particular research object (Yin 2003, 34-36; Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2000, 188-
189). In this study data was collected from several sources and secondary data was
used to support the analysis. The descriptions of what was studied, how the study
was conducted, which are the themes used in analysis and how the analysis was done
can be found from the study (see chapter 4), and thus construct validity was
increased.
Internal validity of the research can be increased by using multiple methods or
suitable, logical methods or by searching diverging cases for the study (Yin 2003, 34;
Koskinen et al. 2005, 257). The methods used in this study are justified earlier in this
study. The use of qualitative research, case study and theme interviews are all
supported as a qualified way to do research in this particular study. The data used
should be as versatile as possible and in this study this can be seen to happen
particularly as the interviews were done within representatives of multiple
viewpoints. Also, the interviewees were given a chance to speak quite freely, even
though the outlines of the interviews were done beforehand. This also enabled the
data to be more versatile. Several sources for the theoretical framework were also
used in this study.
102
External validity in qualitative research can be increased by the conclusions being
transferable and this can be done by carefully describing the process of the study in
such a way that others understand how the study has concluded in this way
(Koskinen et al. 2005, 257). A description as rich and careful as possible was aimed
at by the researcher in this study in order to increase the external validity. It is told in
what way the research was done and what kind of case company was involved.
External validity also refers to the ability to generalise the conclusions to a wider
context (Yin 2003, 37). In general it is believed that the generalisation is not easy in
single case studies (ibid.). However, the generalisation in case studies strives for
analytical generalisation and not statistical generalisation, meaning that it is the aim
of the researcher to generalise only a particular set of the results. It is believed also in
this study that the results can be analytically generalised, and the compatibility only
has to be verified in different contexts.
In qualitative research, it is important to make explicit the process involved in the
collection and analysis of data (Shaw 1999). Reliability of the research can be
increased by closely describing the phases of the research (Hirsjärvi et al. 2006,
217). In qualitative research, the categorising is seen important in the analysis in
order to increase the reliability (ibid.). In this study this was done by using certain
themes, which can be found from the appendix 4. The phases of the research were
also described carefully (see chapters 1.5, 4.1. and 4.2). The outlines of the
interviews are attached to the research as appendixes, as is also the themes of the
analysis and the categorising of the analysis. According to Hirsjärvi and Hurme
(2000, 184) the excellence or the quality of the research can be improved by
beforehand preparing a well made outline for the interviews and by thinking the
themes more deeply and making additional forms of questions. In this study, the
outlines for interviews were prepared carefully and several additional forms of
questions were made beforehand.
During the interviews the quality of the research can be improved by taking care of
the technical equipment used as well as taking care of the outline of interview being
well gone through (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2000, 184). The quality is also improved by
transcription of the interviews (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2000, 185). This was also done in
103
this study and the ways in which the quality of this study was increased in the
interviews were already presented in chapter 4.2.
For the role of the researcher is central and thus the findings cannot surely be the
same if another researcher made the research, the role of the researcher has been tried
to make clear in the analysis by documenting the analysis and the themes used in it
(see appendices 4 and 5). Reliability can also be increased by using direct citations in
the analysis (Hirsjärvi et al. 2006, 218) and thus direct quotations were made in the
analysis. This also helps to verify the understanding of the researcher as correct.
The table 4 below describes the ways in which the validity and reliability have been
increased in this research.
Table 4. Methods used to improve validity and reliability of the study
Documenting of the researchCareful desing of interviewsExecution of interviews done accuratelyTranscripted interviews
Reliability
Rich description of the research object and how the research was doneExternal validity
Use of suitable research methodsUse of versatile dataUse of multiple sources in constructing the theoretical framework
Internal validity
Multiple sources of evidenceChain of evidenceCareful defining of the research object
Construct validity
Documenting of the researchCareful desing of interviewsExecution of interviews done accuratelyTranscripted interviews
Reliability
Rich description of the research object and how the research was doneExternal validity
Use of suitable research methodsUse of versatile dataUse of multiple sources in constructing the theoretical framework
Internal validity
Multiple sources of evidenceChain of evidenceCareful defining of the research object
Construct validity
6.6 Suggestions for future research
The research topic in this study was new and future research could continue the
research in multiple ways to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon. This
study provides a model of components of corporate brand equity in small and
medium-sized enterprises. The topic is an understudied area, and this is the first
104
model to introduce these components. Thus, it could be beneficial to perform a
multiple case study, in which more than one organisation would be studied and in
this way to get deeper understanding about the phenomenon. Another option would
be to use a more comparative approach in analysing the components of corporate
brand equity to find more knowledge about the differences and roles of the
components. Also, the components now being found, it would be interesting to
deepen the understanding about them in a different environment, for example in a
bigger organisation or a multinational organisation. The study could also be done in a
consumer environment or in different areas of business, and more viewpoints could
be taken into account concerning the topic.
This study could be continued with studying more deeply the components of
corporate brand equity. This could be done for example by studying the relations of
the components, or by studying the influence or the strength of these components
with quantitative research. The study also illuminated the assets of corporate brand
equity, the corporate brand associations, corporate brand awareness, corporate brand
loyalty and perceived quality of corporate brand. These assets could indeed be
further studied to gain more knowledge about them in the context of small and
medium-sized enterprises, for example with quantitative research in multiple
organisations. Also, the generalisation of the framework and components of
corporate brand equity could be increased by using different research methods. The
model could for instance be tested using a quantitative research on the components.
One suggestion for future research is also the analysing and evaluation of the present
state of corporate brand equity in an organisation by using the components of
corporate brand equity as a tool for the analysis.
105
REFERENCES
Aaker, D. A. (1992a). Managing the most important asset: brand equity. Planning
Review, 20(5), 56–58.
Aaker, D. A. (1992b). Strategic Market Management (3rd ed.). New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. Bath, Great Britain: The Bath Press.
Aaker, D. A. & Biel, A. L (1993). Brand Equity & Advertising. Hillsdale, New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Aaker, D. A. & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). Brandien johtaminen. Porvoo: WS
Bookwell Oy.
Abimbola, T. & Kocak, A. (2007). Brand, organisation identity and reputation: SMEs
as expressive organisations: a resources-based perspective. Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal, 10(4), 416–430.
Abimbola, T. & Vallaster, C. (2007). Brand, organisational identity and reputation in
SMEs: on overview. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal,
10(4), 341–348.
Ahonen, M. (2008). Branding – does it even exist among SMEs? Proceedings of the
16th Nordic Conference on Small Business Research, May 21st -23rd 2008,
Tallinn, Estonia.
Alasuutari, P. (1999). Laadullinen tutkimus (3rd ed.). Jyväskylä: Vastapaino.
American Marketing Association (2009). Dictionary. Read 5 May 2009.
http://www.marketingpower.com/_layouts/Dictionary.aspx?dLetter=B.
Argenti, P. A. & Druckenmiller, B. (2004). Reputation and the corporate brand.
Corporate Reputation Review, 6(4), 368–374.
Balmer, J. M. T. (2001). Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate
marketing – seeing through the fog. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4),
248–291.
Balmer, J. M. T. & Gray, Edmund R. (1999). Corporate identity and corporate
communications: creating a competitive advantage. Corporate Communications:
An International Journal, 4(4), 171–176.
Balmer, J. M.T. & Gray, Edmund R. (2003). Corporate brands: what are they? What
of them? European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 972–997.
106
Balmer, J. M. T. & Greyser, Stephen A. (2006). Corporate marketing – integrating
corporate identity, corporate branding, corporate communications, corporate
image and corporate reputation. European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8), 730–
741.
Balmer, J. M. T. & Liao, M. (2007). Student corporate brand identification: an
exploratory case study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
12(4), 356–375.
Bergstrom, A., Blumenthal, D. & Crothers, S. (2002). Why internal branding matters:
The case of Saab. Corporate reputation review, 5(2/3), 133–142.
Bernstein, D. (2003). Corporate branding – back to basics. European Journal of
Marketing, 37(7/8), 1133–1141.
Berry, L. L. (2000). Cultivating service brand equity. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 28(1), 128–137.
Berthon, P., Ewing, M. T. & Napoli, J. (2008). Brand management in small to
medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 27–45.
Beverland, M., Napoli, J. & Yakimova, R. (2007). Branding the business marketing
offer: exploring brand attributes in business markets. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, 22(6), 394–399.
Biel, A. L. (1992). How brand image drives brand equity. Journal of Advertising
Research, 32(6), 6–12.
Boyle, E. (2003). A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing
sector in the UK. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 12(2/3), 79–93.
Cobb-Walgren, C. J., Ruble, C. A. & Donthu, N. (1995). Brand equity, brand
preference, and purchase intent. Journal of Advertising, 24(3), 25–41.
The commission of the European Communities (2003). Commission
recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definitions of micro, small and
medium-sized enterprises. Read 25 November 2008. http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2003/l_124/l_12420030520en00360041.pdf
Davies, G. & Chun, R. (2002). Gaps between the internal and external perceptions of
the corporate brand. Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 144–158.
de Chernatory, L. (2002). Would a brand smell any sweeter by a corporate name?
Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 114–132.
de Chernatory, L. & Cottam, S. (2008). Interactions between organisational cultures
and corporate brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(1), 13–24.
107
Dubois, A. & Gadde, L. (2002). Systematic combining: an abductive approach to
case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553–560.
Einwiller, S. & Will, M. (2002). Towards an integrated approach to corporate
branding – an empirical study. Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, 7(2), 100–109.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy
of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
El-Tawy, N. & Tollington, T. (2008). The recognition and measurement of brand
assets: an exploration of the accounting/marketing interface. Journal of
Marketing Management, 24(7/8), 711–731.
Eriksson, P. & Kovalainen, A. (2008). Qualitative Methods in Business Research.
London: Sage.
Eskola, J. & Suoranta, J. (1998). Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen (2nd ed.).
Jyväskylä: Vastapaino.
Eurostat (2008). European business, special topics/small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs). Read 24 November 2008.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=2293,59872848,2293_6819
5655&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL#SME
Gilmore, A., Carson, D. & Grant, K. (2001). SME marketing in practice. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, 19(1), 6–11.
Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative Methods in Management Research (2nd ed.).
California: Sage Publications Inc.
Halal, W. E. (2000). Corporate community: a theory of the firm uniting profitability
and responsibility. Strategy & Leadership, 28(2), 1–11.
Harris, F. & de Chernatory, L. (2001). Corporate branding and corporate brand
performance. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 441–456.
Hatch, M. J. & Schultz, M. (1997). Relations between organizational culture, identity
and image. European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 356–365.
Hatch, M. J. & Schultz, M. (2003). Bringing the corporation into corporate branding.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 1041–1064.
Hirsjärvi, S. & Hurme, H. (1988). Teemahaastattelu (4th ed.). Helsinki:
Yliopistopaino.
Hirsjärvi, S. & Hurme, H. (2000). Tutkimushaastattelu – Teemahaastattelun teoria ja
käytäntö. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.
108
Hirsjärvi, S., Remes, P. & Sajavaara, P. (2006). Tutki ja kirjoita (12th ed.). Jyväskylä:
Gummerrus Kirjapaino Oy.
Hoeffler, S. & Keller, K. L. (2002). Building brand equity through corporate societal
marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(1), 78–89.
Inskip, I. (2004). Corporate branding for small to medium-sized businesses – A
missed opportunity or an indulgence? Journal of Marketing, 11(5), 358–365.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based
brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
Keller, K. L. (2000). Building and managing corporate brand equity. In: Schultz, M.,
Hatch, M. J. & Larsen, M. H. (ed.). The Expressive Organisation: Linking
Identity, Reputation and the Corporate Brand. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
115-137.
Keller, K. L. (2003). Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kerin, R. A. & Sethuraman, R. (1998). Exploring the brand value-shareholder value
nexus for consumer goods companies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 26(4), 260–273.
King, S. (1991). Brand-building in the 1990s. The Journal of Consumer Marketing,
8(4), 43–52.
Knox, S. (2004). Positioning and branding your organisation. Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 13(2), 105–115.
Knox, S. & Bickerton, D. (2003). The six conventions of corporate branding.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 998–1016.
Knox, S., Maklan, S. & Thompson, K. E. (2000). Building the unique organization
value proposition. In: Schultz, M., Hatch, M. J. & Larsen, M. H. (ed.). The
Expressive Organisation: Linking Identity, Reputation and the Corporate Brand.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 138–153.
Kollmann, T. & Suckow, C. (2007). The corporate brand naming process in the net
economy. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 10(4), 349–
361.
Koskinen, I., Alasuutari, P. & Peltonen, T. (2005). Laadulliset menetelmät
kauppatieteissä. Tampere: Vastapaino.
Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. & Wong, V. (1996). Principles of Marketing –
The European Edition. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe.
109
Kotler, P. & Keller, K. L. (2006). Marketing Management (12th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Krake, F. B.G. J. M. (2005). Successful brand management in SMEs: a new theory
and practical hints. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(4/5),
228–238.
Lassar, W., Mittal, B. & Sharma, A. (1995). Measuring customer-based brand equity.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12(4), 11–19.
Lehmann, D. R & Winer, R. S. (ed.) (2002). Product Management (3rd ed.). New
York: The McGraw-Hill.
Leitch, S. & Richardson, N. (2003). Corporate branding in the new economy.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 1065–1079.
Louro, M. J. & Cunha, P. V. (2001). Brand management paradigms. Journal of
Marketing Management, 17, 849–875.
Mackay, M. M. (2001). Evaluation of brand equity measures: further empirical
results. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 10(1), 38–51.
Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning Qualitative Research: a Philosophic
and Practical Guide. London: The Falmer Press.
Merrilees, B. (2007). A theory of brand-led SME new venture development.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 10(4), 403–415.
Motion, J., Leitch, S. & Brodie, R. J. (2003). Equity in corporate co-branding.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 1080–1094.
Muzellec, L., Doogan, M. & Lambkin, M. (2003). Corporate rebranding – an
exploratory review. Irish Marketing Review, 16(2), 31–40.
Muzellec, L. & Lambkin, M. (2006). Corporate rebranding: destroying, transferring
or creating brand equity? European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8), 803–824.
Mäkinen, V. (1980). Yrityksen toiminnan tutkimisen lähestymistavoista – toiminta-
analyyttisen tutkimusstrategian kehittelyä. Tampere: Yrityksen taloustieteen ja
yksityisoikeuden laitoksen julkaisuja.
Neilimo, K. & Näsi, J. (1980). Nomoteettinen tutkimusote ja suomalainen yrityksen
taloustiede. Tampere: Yrityksen taloustieteen ja yksityisoikeuden laitoksen
julkaisuja.
Ojasalo, J., Nätti, S. & Olkkonen, R. (2008). Brand building in software SMEs: an
empirical study. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(2), 92–107.
110
Olins, W. (2000). How brands are taking over the corporation. In: Schultz, M., Hatch,
M. J. & Larsen, M. H. (ed.). The Expressive Organisation: Linking Identity,
Reputation and the Corporate Brand. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 51–65.
Pappu, R., Quester, P. G. & Cooksey, R. W. (2005). Consumer-based brand equity:
improving the measurement – empirical evidence. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 14(3), 143–154.
Perry, C. (1998). Processes of a case study methodology for postgraduate research in
marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 32(9/10), 785–802.
Pihlanto, P. (1994). The action-oriented approach and case study method in
management studies. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 10(4), 369–382.
Pitta, D. A. & Katsanis, L. P. (1995). Understanding brand equity for successful
brand extensions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12(4), 51–64.
Reijonen, H. (2008). Understanding the small business owner: what they really aim
at and how this relates to firm performance. Management Research News, 31(8),
616–629.
Rode, V. & Vallaster, C. (2005). Corporate branding for start-ups: the crucial role of
entrepreneurs. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(2), 121–135.
Schoenfelder, J. & Harris, P. (2004). High-tech corporate branding: lessons for
market research in the next decade. Qualitative Market Research: An
International Journal, 7(2), 91–99.
Shaw, E. (1999). A guide to the qualitative research process: evidence form a small
firm study. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 2(2), 59–70.
Simon, C. J. & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The measurement and determinants of brand
equity: a financial approach. Marketing Science, 12(1), 28–52.
Trueman, M., Klemm, M. & Giroud, A. (2004). Can a city communicate? Bradford
as a corporate brand. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 9(4),
317–330.
Tuominen, S. (2006). Brändin rahallisen arvon mittaaminen. Menetelmävertailu.
Lisensiaatintutkielma. Joensuun yliopisto.
Urde, M. (2003). Core value-based corporate brand building. European Journal of
Marketing, 37(7/8), 1017–1040.
Valkokari, K. & Helander, N. (2007). Knowledge management in different types of
strategic SME networks. Management Research News, 30(8), 597–608.
111
Watson, K., Hogarth-Scott, S. & Wilson, N. (1998). Small business start-ups: success
factors and support implications. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour & Research, 4(3), 217–238.
Welsh, J. A. & White, J. F. (1981). A small business is not a little big business.
Harvard Business Review, 59(July/August), 18–32.
Winters, L. C. (1991). Brand equity measures: some recent advances. Marketing
Research, 3(4), 70–73.
Wong, H. Y. & Merrilees, B. (2005). A brand orientation typology for SMEs: a case
research approach. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(2/3), 155–162.
Wood, L. (2000). Brands and brand equity: definition and management. Management
Decision, 38(9), 662–669.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research – design and methods (3rd ed.). California:
Sage Publications Inc.
112
Appendix 1 Outline of the interview, managing director
To begin with
- Employees: role, assignments, the amount - The turnover of the organisation - Own role in the organisation
Owner/Manager
- the role in the organisation
Personnel
- the role of personnel - awareness concerning the brand - affection on the brand - what kind of personnel is wanted?
Corporate core values
- mission, vision, goals? - do values exist? - role of values
Organisational culture
- atmosphere - guidelines etc
Name of the organisation
- origins of the name
Actions of the organisation
- affecting the brand?
Stakeholders
- co-operation - reputation among stakeholders - part of the brand? - feedback - what kind of relationships?
Corporate brand associations
- Reputation of the organisation - Impacting the reputation
113
- Communication about the brand
Corporate brand loyalty
- perceptions about the brand now and then - what is different concerning other organisations?
Corporate brand awareness
- Do you have a brand? From what it constitutes of? - How does the brand build up?
Perceived quality of corporate brand
- perceptions about the brand - what affects?
Anything else?
114
Appendix 2 Outline of the interview, employee
To begin with
- the role in the organisation
Owner/Manager
- is the brand lead?
Personnel
- your role - what kind of persons employed? - some similar features?
Corporate core values
- guidelines? - existing values? - how these seen? - goals?
Organisational culture
- what kind of organisation to work in - atmosphere - guidelines?
Actions of the organisation
- certain ways of working? - certain events?
Stakeholders
- responsibility on - communication with
Corporate brand associations
- reputation - associations coming in mind?
Corporate brand loyalty
- what differs the organisation from others?
Corporate brand awareness
115
- brand exists? - what is important?
Anything else?
116
Appendix 3 Outline of the interview, customer
To begin with
- clear vision/picture of the organisation? - co-operation
Owner/Manager
- opinions?
Product/service
- thoughts, assumptions, opinions? - what the organisation does?
Personnel
- experiences - opinions
Corporate core values
- is there? - opinions
Organisational culture
- what do you see/feel?
Name of the organisation
- what comes in mind?
Actions of the organisation
- experiences - communication?
Stakeholders
- what would you tell to others? - your role - feedback
Corporate brand associations
- reputation - what do you connect to the brand? - what kind of associations?
117
- what affects this? - face of the brand? - message about the brand?
Corporate brand loyalty
- co-operation - relationship with the organisation - why?
Corporate brand awareness
- familiarity of the organisation - is there a brand? - where to get information?
Perceived quality of corporate brand
- assumptions - experiences
Anything else?
118
Appendix 4 Themes used in the analysis of the data
QSR Nvivo nodes
Owner/Manager
Personnel
Product/service
Corporate core values
Organisational culture
Name of the organisation
Actions of the organisation
Stakeholders
Corporate brand associations
Corporate brand loyalty
Corporate brand awareness
Perceived quality of corporate brand
119
Appendix 5 Embodiment of the components in EHP-Tekniikka Ltd
Component Embodiment of the component in the organisation
Stakeholders - Co-operation between the organisation and stakeholders, especially with local entrepreneurs
- Internet and personal selling as ways of finding new customers - Phone and e-mail along with personal meetings mostly used to communicate
with existing customers - Relationships with customers lasting and honest - Certain people to be in contact with - Strong co-operation with customers especially with designing and solution
finding - Contact with the customer at least once a month - Maintenance of the relationships mostly seen as renewing contracts - Feedback asked related to products mainly - Feedback affects strongly the actions of the organisation - Customers increase the visibility of the organisation with spreading
information - The impressions of customers build the reputation of the organisation - Customers act as a reference
Name of the organisation
- The name is a possible development target - The name is important and it is equated to the corporate brand - The name is seen as telling about the organisation - The name is a link between the organisation and outsiders - The name is seen as parallel to the organisation and its operation
Actions of the organisation
- Everything the organisation does can affect its image and the corporate brandas a whole
- The image of the organisation is seen as made up of ways of action - Some actions can be affected and controlled in the organisation, others not - It is seen important for example to be visible in right places, not to make
mistakes and to keep the promises made to customers - Some actions are not even noticed in the organisation, such as employers
behaviour and certain happenings with them, or joining as a part of a group - Everyone in the organisation is part of the actions - Actions which are visible to customers and other stakeholders are especially
important concerning the corporate brand - Actions of the organisation are more or less linked to other components of
corporate brand equity
Personnel - Defined roles and remits in the personnel - On the other hand, personnel has a versatile role and everyone is doing
everything - Convivial ambiance in the organisation, certain sense of solidarity - Permanency in the personnel is seen important - Personnel is wanted to be able to work in the field, understand technology and
be able to work in extreme conditions - The personnel is wanted to be flexible, unprejudiced and eligible to learn - Guidelines and values of doing have to be taught to the personnel - Everyone is in contact with stakeholders/customers - Certain know-how and expertise affects who is in contact to whom - Relationships between personnel and stakeholders can develop more and
more personal due to the continuous contacts - Behaviour, clothing, communication and working style of personnel affect the
image of the organisation - Atmosphere among the personnel affects the whole picture about the
organisation
120
- The personnel may not always be aware of their important role concerning thecorporate brand
- The personnel is strongly linked to the organisation by the customer
Owner/manager - The managing director has a central role and is responsible of the organisation in many ways
- The managing director is seen not only as a manager, but also as part of thepersonnel
- Managing director is the most visible person of the organisation - The corporate brand is in the responsibility of the managing director - The managing director is communicating about the corporate brand to
stakeholders, outsiders and also to the personnel of the organisation - The managing director is seen as the face of the corporate brand and gives the
brand a physical appearance - The corporate brand is personified to the managing director and his
personality - Characteristics of the managing director are connected to the organisation - The managing director is seen as a strong person, enthusiastic about the
products and believing in what the organisation is doing - The managing director is seen as carrying the business onwards - The managing director is seen as a distinctive feature of the organisation - The corporate brand is even seen as build upon the managing director
Corporate core values
- No written or clearly defined core values exist in the organisation - Corporate core values in the organisation are certain unwritten principles
which are expressed to the personnel by the managing director - Core values are guidelines for everyday work - Core values are not well-established and it is not obvious in the organisation
which are the core values - Core values are seen as to exist through the goals of business and are guiding
the operations of business in the organisation - Without the core values the business is not working and there is no business - The core values includes such as being trustworthy, of good quality, quick in
operations and having a deep, versatile know-how - These features of the business are according to the managing director
constantly developed - The importance of core values is highly acknowledged in the organisation - Core values are related to the image and reputation of the organisation - The way of action and the working culture are specified through the core
values - The personnel can relate to the core values - Core values are guiding the behaviour and communication of the personnel - Core values are not visible outside the organisation
121
Organisational culture
- Organisational culture is part of core values and their realisation in theorganisation
- Core values are guiding the organisational culture in the organisation - Organisational culture is also linked to the personnel as it is executing and
living it - Organisational culture is how things are done in the organisation and it is
linked to the corporate brand in this way - When there are no mistakes done, the reputation of the organisation can be
good - Organisational culture includes features such as supplying the device in time,
taking care of the customers and doing them even more than has beenpromised
- The reputation is seen as build up through ways of operating - With hard work everyone can affect the reputation - It is seen important that the business is done the right way in the organisation - Part of doing things right is the principle of keeping it simple - The behaviour and doing of things right are guided by the managing director
with simple guidelines - The guidelines include such as keeping what has been promised, doing a work
of good quality and trying to work before problems arise - There are no certain official policies in the organisation about how things
should be done, but instead it should be clear to everyone - The ways of working are also learned through working - It is kept important in the organisation that customers should be listened to,
the organisational culture is customer oriented - There exists certain routines guiding the ways of working
Product/Service - The quality and the price of the product with the maintenance service are thedistinctive features of the organisation which differentiate it from others
- Also the easiness and usability of the product are seen as distinctive features - The features in the organisation seen as important concerning the business
operations are linked to product and service: price, quickness, the quality ofservice or maintenance and technical know-how
- The organisation is seen as to have the corporate brand because of its uniqueproducts and service concepts
- The product is seen as inevitable in order to have a corporate brand - The whole business is seen to build around a product - The image of the organisation is linked strongly to the products and services
of the organisation - The image is seen as to consist of features such as delivery on time or
functioning of the products - The co-operation with customers seems to be strongly connected to product
development - Products and services are also related to corporate brand equity through other
components of it